The impact of video nasal endoscopy on patient satisfaction

Vidur Bhalla, D. David Beahm, Kevin J. Sykes, Kavindu K. Ndeti, Alexander G Chiu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Video nasal endoscopy has significant associated expense for practices, but its use has been justified by the benefit it provides to the examiner. No study has examined the perceived benefit to the patient. In this study, the impact of video endoscopy on patient satisfaction is evaluated. Methods: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded study was performed on new patients receiving care in the rhinology clinics of a tertiary-care center. Patients were randomized into the standard endoscopic examination (SEE) or video endoscopic examination (VEE) groups. SEE patients had their examination performed with the physician viewing the exam through the eyepiece, without a video camera, and subsequently had their examination explained. VEE patients had their examination performed with a video camera attached to the scope, recorded, and then used for the explanation. All patients were asked to complete the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) and the 18-item Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short-Form (PSQ-18). Statistical analysis was performed to identify differences between cohorts. Results: There was no significant demographic difference between groups. SNOT-22 total and domain scores were similar between both groups (p > 0.05). VEE patients had significantly higher general satisfaction (p = 0.048) and communication (p = 0.028) domains within the PSQ-18. There was no difference between other domains (p > 0.05). Conclusion: VEE is a valuable tool for otolaryngologists and patients. Further studies evaluating variance in patient compliance and symptomatology may provide further justification for its use.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalInternational Forum of Allergy and Rhinology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Patient Satisfaction
Nose
Endoscopy
Patient Compliance
Tertiary Care Centers
Patient Care
Communication
Demography
Physicians

Keywords

  • Chronic disease
  • Endoscopy
  • Outcomes
  • Rhinosinusitis
  • Satisfaction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology and Allergy
  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

The impact of video nasal endoscopy on patient satisfaction. / Bhalla, Vidur; Beahm, D. David; Sykes, Kevin J.; Ndeti, Kavindu K.; Chiu, Alexander G.

In: International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bhalla, Vidur ; Beahm, D. David ; Sykes, Kevin J. ; Ndeti, Kavindu K. ; Chiu, Alexander G. / The impact of video nasal endoscopy on patient satisfaction. In: International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology. 2018.
@article{61f77a675cf9480ab7c083597a987954,
title = "The impact of video nasal endoscopy on patient satisfaction",
abstract = "Background: Video nasal endoscopy has significant associated expense for practices, but its use has been justified by the benefit it provides to the examiner. No study has examined the perceived benefit to the patient. In this study, the impact of video endoscopy on patient satisfaction is evaluated. Methods: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded study was performed on new patients receiving care in the rhinology clinics of a tertiary-care center. Patients were randomized into the standard endoscopic examination (SEE) or video endoscopic examination (VEE) groups. SEE patients had their examination performed with the physician viewing the exam through the eyepiece, without a video camera, and subsequently had their examination explained. VEE patients had their examination performed with a video camera attached to the scope, recorded, and then used for the explanation. All patients were asked to complete the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) and the 18-item Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short-Form (PSQ-18). Statistical analysis was performed to identify differences between cohorts. Results: There was no significant demographic difference between groups. SNOT-22 total and domain scores were similar between both groups (p > 0.05). VEE patients had significantly higher general satisfaction (p = 0.048) and communication (p = 0.028) domains within the PSQ-18. There was no difference between other domains (p > 0.05). Conclusion: VEE is a valuable tool for otolaryngologists and patients. Further studies evaluating variance in patient compliance and symptomatology may provide further justification for its use.",
keywords = "Chronic disease, Endoscopy, Outcomes, Rhinosinusitis, Satisfaction",
author = "Vidur Bhalla and Beahm, {D. David} and Sykes, {Kevin J.} and Ndeti, {Kavindu K.} and Chiu, {Alexander G}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/alr.22100",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology",
issn = "2042-6976",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The impact of video nasal endoscopy on patient satisfaction

AU - Bhalla, Vidur

AU - Beahm, D. David

AU - Sykes, Kevin J.

AU - Ndeti, Kavindu K.

AU - Chiu, Alexander G

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Background: Video nasal endoscopy has significant associated expense for practices, but its use has been justified by the benefit it provides to the examiner. No study has examined the perceived benefit to the patient. In this study, the impact of video endoscopy on patient satisfaction is evaluated. Methods: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded study was performed on new patients receiving care in the rhinology clinics of a tertiary-care center. Patients were randomized into the standard endoscopic examination (SEE) or video endoscopic examination (VEE) groups. SEE patients had their examination performed with the physician viewing the exam through the eyepiece, without a video camera, and subsequently had their examination explained. VEE patients had their examination performed with a video camera attached to the scope, recorded, and then used for the explanation. All patients were asked to complete the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) and the 18-item Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short-Form (PSQ-18). Statistical analysis was performed to identify differences between cohorts. Results: There was no significant demographic difference between groups. SNOT-22 total and domain scores were similar between both groups (p > 0.05). VEE patients had significantly higher general satisfaction (p = 0.048) and communication (p = 0.028) domains within the PSQ-18. There was no difference between other domains (p > 0.05). Conclusion: VEE is a valuable tool for otolaryngologists and patients. Further studies evaluating variance in patient compliance and symptomatology may provide further justification for its use.

AB - Background: Video nasal endoscopy has significant associated expense for practices, but its use has been justified by the benefit it provides to the examiner. No study has examined the perceived benefit to the patient. In this study, the impact of video endoscopy on patient satisfaction is evaluated. Methods: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded study was performed on new patients receiving care in the rhinology clinics of a tertiary-care center. Patients were randomized into the standard endoscopic examination (SEE) or video endoscopic examination (VEE) groups. SEE patients had their examination performed with the physician viewing the exam through the eyepiece, without a video camera, and subsequently had their examination explained. VEE patients had their examination performed with a video camera attached to the scope, recorded, and then used for the explanation. All patients were asked to complete the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) and the 18-item Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short-Form (PSQ-18). Statistical analysis was performed to identify differences between cohorts. Results: There was no significant demographic difference between groups. SNOT-22 total and domain scores were similar between both groups (p > 0.05). VEE patients had significantly higher general satisfaction (p = 0.048) and communication (p = 0.028) domains within the PSQ-18. There was no difference between other domains (p > 0.05). Conclusion: VEE is a valuable tool for otolaryngologists and patients. Further studies evaluating variance in patient compliance and symptomatology may provide further justification for its use.

KW - Chronic disease

KW - Endoscopy

KW - Outcomes

KW - Rhinosinusitis

KW - Satisfaction

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85042166052&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85042166052&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/alr.22100

DO - 10.1002/alr.22100

M3 - Article

C2 - 29457873

AN - SCOPUS:85042166052

JO - International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology

JF - International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology

SN - 2042-6976

ER -