title: Providing an endoscopy report to patients after a procedure: a low-cost intervention with high returns.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Providing a procedure report to patients after endoscopy is inconsistently practiced by clinicians.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate the effect of providing a procedure report to patients after an outpatient endoscopy.
  
  
  METHODS
  Demographic data, including age, sex, race, and endoscopic procedures. Assessments one week after the procedure included anxiety, satisfaction, recall of endoscopic findings and recommendations, and compliance.
  
  
  METHODS
  A prospective, randomized, single-center, investigator-blinded study. Anxiety was measured by using the Beck Anxiety Inventory; satisfaction was measured with a modified American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy survey, which was validated as part of this study, and recall and compliance was measured by a patient interview, during which responses were compared with the original endoscopy report.
  
  
  METHODS
  Single university outpatient endoscopy laboratory. Between June and September 2005, 115 patients were randomized, and 83 completed this protocol.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The two groups were equally matched, except the intervention group (received report) was older (54.4 vs 50.7 years; P = .037). Receipt of an endoscopy report reduced postprocedure anxiety (P = .001) and improved recall of findings and recommendations (P = .001 for both). Satisfaction was very high for all patients and was unaffected by receipt of a report. Patients older than 60 years had significantly lower satisfaction scores by approximately 6 points (P = .004). Some subcategories of compliance were significantly better in the intervention group, but there was no effect on the number of patients who complied with all recommendations.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Small number of patients.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The receipt of an endoscopy report at discharge reduces postprocedure anxiety, improves recall of findings and recommendations, and may increase compliance. This inexpensive and safe practice should be routinely adopted.
authors.affiliation: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
authors.forename: Maya
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Spodik
authors.forename: Joshua
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Goldman
authors.forename: Kirsten
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Merli
authors.forename: Cathy
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Walker
authors.forename: Barbara
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Alpini
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Kastenberg
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D004282:Documentation; D016099:Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal / Q000191:economics / Q000523:psychology; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008499:Medical Records; D011939:Mental Recall; D008875:Middle Aged; D010044:Outpatient Clinics, Hospital; D033283:Patient Access to Records; D010349:Patient Compliance; D010351:Patient Discharge; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D010817:Physician-Patient Relations; D011446:Prospective Studies