The Colonoscopy Satisfaction and Safety Questionnaire (CSSQP) for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Development and Validation Study

Overview

Journal Int J Environ Res Public Health

Publisher MDPI

Specialties Environmental Health
Public Health

Date 2019 Feb 2

PMID 30704126

Citations 6

Authors

Alicia Brotons

Mercedes Guilabert

Francisco Javier Lacueva

Jose Joaquin Mira

Blanca Lumbreras

Maria Dolores Pico

Julian Vitaller

Mariana Fe Garcia-Sepulcre

German Belda

Javier Sola-Vera

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Colonoscopy services working in colorectal cancer screening programs must perform periodic controls to improve the quality based on patients' experiences. However, there are no validated instruments in this setting that include the two core dimensions for optimal care: satisfaction and safety. The aim of this study was to design and validate a specific questionnaire for patients undergoing screening colonoscopy after a positive fecal occult blood test, the Colonoscopy Satisfaction and Safety Questionnaire based on patients' experience (CSSQP). The design included a review of available evidence and used focus groups to identify the relevant dimensions to produce the instrument (content validity). Face validity was analyzed involving 15 patients. Reliability and construct and empirical validity were calculated. Validation involved patients from the colorectal cancer screening program at two referral hospitals in Spain. The CSSQP version 1 consisted of 15 items. The principal components analysis of the satisfaction items isolated three factors with saturation of elements above 0.52 and with high internal consistency and split-half readability: Information, Care, and Service and Facilities features. The analysis of the safety items isolated two factors with element saturations above 0.58: Information Gaps and Safety Incidents. The CSSQP is a new valid and reliable tool for measuring patient' experiences, including satisfaction and safety perception, after a colorectal cancer screening colonoscopy.

Citing Articles

Improving the Consent Process With an Informed Consent Video Prior to Outpatient Colonoscopy.

Lopes E, Boneschansker L, Chu J, Ha J, Badran Y, Diaz P Gastro Hep Adv. 2023; 2(8):1082-1087.

PMID: 38088988 PMC: 10715800. DOI: 10.1016/j.gastha.2023.07.016.

Patients' experience of using colonoscopy as a diagnostic test after a positive FOBT/FIT: a systematic review of the quantitative literature.

Kayal G, Kerrison R, Hirst Y, Von Wagner C BMJ Open. 2023; 13(9):e071391.

PMID: 37734900 PMC: 10514644. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071391.

Compilation and evaluation of gastrointestinal endoscopy satisfaction scale.

Liu T, Deng H, Yu X, Long X, Gong P, Tian L Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2023; 48(6):859-867.

PMID: 37587071 PMC: 10930431. DOI: 10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2023.220615.

Patient-Reported Experience Measures for Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Ethnography.

Rosvall A, Annersten Gershater M, Kumlien C, Toth E, Axelsson M Diagnostics (Basel). 2022; 12(2).

PMID: 35204332 PMC: 8871001. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12020242.

Satisfaction and experience with colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review of validated patient reported outcome measures.

Selva A, Selva C, Alvarez-Perez Y, Tora N, Lopez P, Terraza-Nunez R BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021; 21(1):230.

PMID: 34706652 PMC: 8549248. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-021-01430-7.

References

Yan J, Liu K, Zhang L, Chu T, Wang X . Patient reporting of undesirable events: a pilot study in China. Int J Qual Health Care. 2017; 29(3):360-365. DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzx029. View

Mira J, Perez-Jover V, Lorenzo S, Aranaz J, Vitaller J . [Qualitative research: a valid alternative]. Aten Primaria. 2004; 34(4):161-6. PMC: 7669179. DOI: 10.1016/s0212-6567(04)78902-7. View

Yanai H, Schushan-Eisen I, Neuman S, Novis B . Patient satisfaction with endoscopy measurement and assessment. Dig Dis. 2008; 26(1):75-9. DOI: 10.1159/000109392. View

Rex D, Schoenfeld P, Cohen J, Pike I, Adler D, Fennerty M . Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014; 110(1):72-90. DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2014.385. View

Leung D, Chow K, Lo S, So W, Chan C . Contributing Factors to Colorectal Cancer Screening among Chinese People: A Review of Quantitative Studies. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016; 13(5). PMC: 4881131. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph13050506. View

Flaherty J, Gaviria F, Pathak D, Mitchell T, WINTROB R, Richman J . Developing instruments for cross-cultural psychiatric research. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1988; 176(5):257-63. View

Guessous I, Dash C, Lapin P, Doroshenk M, Smith R, Klabunde C . Colorectal cancer screening barriers and facilitators in older persons. Prev Med. 2009; 50(1-2):3-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.12.005. View

Brown S, Bevan R, Rubin G, Nixon C, Dunn S, Panter S . Patient-derived measures of GI endoscopy: a meta-narrative review of the literature. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015; 81(5):1130-40.e1-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.11.047. View

Sint Nicolaas J, de Jonge V, de Man R, Borg F, Cahen D, Moolenaar W . The Global Rating Scale in clinical practice: a comprehensive quality assurance programme for endoscopy departments. Dig Liver Dis. 2012; 44(11):919-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2012.06.021. View

10.

MacIntosh D, Dube C, Hollingworth R, Veldhuyzen Van Zanten S, Daniels S, Ghattas G . The endoscopy Global Rating Scale-Canada: development and implementation of a quality improvement tool. Can J Gastroenterol. 2013; 27(2):74-82. PMC: 3731117. DOI: 10.1155/2013/165804. View

11.

Chartier L, Arthurs E, Sewitch M . Patient satisfaction with colonoscopy: a literature review and pilot study. Can J Gastroenterol. 2009; 23(3):203-9. PMC: 2694655. DOI: 10.1155/2009/903545. View

12.

Hutchings H, Cheung W, Alrubaiy L, Durai D, Russell I, Williams J . Development and validation of the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Satisfaction Questionnaire (GESQ). Endoscopy. 2015; 47(12):1137-43. DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1392547. View

13.

Blalock S, DeVellis B, Sandler R . Participation in fecal occult blood screening: a critical review. Prev Med. 1987; 16(1):9-18. DOI: 10.1016/0091-7435(87)90002-8. View

14.

Kiviniemi M, Bennett A, Zaiter M, Marshall J . Individual-level factors in colorectal cancer screening: a review of the literature on the relation of individual-level health behavior constructs and screening behavior. Psychooncology. 2011; 20(10):1023-33. PMC: 3038178. DOI: 10.1002/pon.1865. View

15.

Sint Nicolaas J, de Jonge V, Korfage I, Ter Borg F, Brouwer J, Cahen D . Benchmarking patient experiences in colonoscopy using the Global Rating Scale. Endoscopy. 2012; 44(5):462-72. DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1291663. View

16.

Johanson J . Continuous quality improvement in the ambulatory endoscopy center. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2002; 12(2):351-65. DOI: 10.1016/s1052-5157(01)00015-0. View

17.

Johanson J, Schmitt C, Deas Jr T, Eisen G, Freeman M, Goldstein J . Quality and outcomes assessment in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001; 52(6 Pt 1):827-830. View

18.

Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M . Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2014; 136(5):E359-86. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.29210. View

19.

Kapidzic A, Korfage I, Van Dam L, van Roon A, Reijerink J, Zauber A . Quality of life in participants of a CRC screening program. Br J Cancer. 2012; 107(8):1295-301. PMC: 3494432. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2012.386. View

20.

Ristikankare M, Hartikainen J, Heikkinen M, Janatuinen E, Julkunen R . The effects of gender and age on the colonoscopic examination. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2001; 32(1):69-75. DOI: 10.1097/00004836-200101000-00016. View