In this study we compared 3 methods of conducting the preanesthetic visit. We prospectively studied 197 consecutive surgical patients who were to undergo general anesthesia. The patients were randomized to a routine preanesthetic interview, a brochure plus an interview, or a self-made documentary video plus an interview. After the preanesthetic visit, the degree of patient satisfaction and information gain was quantified by a questionnaire for each method. The questions on patient satisfaction were assessed on a six-point scale, and those on information gain were assessed on a multiple-choice basis. The video plus interview group showed the highest point scores (98% of the possible maximum sum point score in patient satisfaction and 93% of the maximum sum score in information gain). In contrast, the patients of the brochure plus interview group revealed 93% for patient satisfaction and 80% for information gain, and in the standard interview group, the corresponding figures were 91% and 72%, respectively. The maximum sum scores in patient satisfaction and information gain were significantly different between the interview and the video groups, but not between the interview and the brochure groups. Therefore, these data suggest that the use of a documentary video to supplement a preoperative interview may enhance patient satisfaction and maximize information gain.
In the current study a questionnaire was developed to evaluate the preanesthetic visit to prepare patients for general anesthesia with regard to the effects on in-hospital quality of care. The questionnaire consists of one part pertaining to patient satisfaction and one part pertaining to the information gained from the preanesthetic visit. In a first phase, the questionnaire was generated and then validated in 104 patients undergoing general or vascular surgery at the University of Heidelberg, Germany. As a result of the pretest evaluation, the preliminary pool of questions could be reduced. Consequently, the final questionnaire is composed of six questions on patient satisfaction and six questions on information gained after the preanesthetic visit as well as one question regarding the number of preanesthetic consultations prior to general anesthesia. In the part of the questionnaire on patient satisfaction, responses can be given on a 6-point scale ranging from -3 (statement is not correct) to +3 (statement is correct). The scores -3 to +3 are assigned 1-6 points, in order to calculate a total sum score to measure patient satisfaction. The part on information gained contains multiple-choice questions with four possible answers, of which only one is correct. Analogous to the measurement of patient satisfaction, a total sum score can be calculated to evaluate the information gain after the preanesthetic visit. The present study shows the suitability of a questionnaire to evaluate the quality of health care after the preanesthetic visit with the parameters patient satisfaction and information gain. Such a questionnaire can be used to compare different premedication techniques and, thus, might contribute to improve the quality of health care.
Small hospitals often lack the financial and personnel resources to realize innovative postoperative pain management concepts. This is not-as shown here-an absolute contradiction. The regular measurement of pain and its documentation by ward nurses as well as the appropriate prescription of analgesics play a key role in our concept. The joint establishment of guidelines, information sessions and the on-going dialog between the various professional groups guarantees the necessary consensus of all specialists involved in postoperative pain control. If an anesthetist is available 24 h a day, a nurse-based acute pain service (APS) becomes available for managing patients with patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) systems. The use of PCA and the performance of pain visits at regular intervals increase patient comfort and satisfaction. In addition, it can contribute to reduced hospitalization time in the context of fast-track rehabilitation programs. In our opinion, embedding the measures in a quality management program has a valuable catalytic effect, although implementation takes at least 1-2 years.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.