3 research outputs found
Psychological impact of preconception counseling: Assessment of anxiety before and during pregnancy
Objective: Assessment of anxiety levels in women and men before and after preconception counseling and during the first trimester of pregnancy. Methods: Couples were recruited from the fertility clinic of the University Medical Center Nijmegen, the Netherlands. Anxiety was assessed using the 40-item Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Results: 53 women and 51 men (74%) completed the STAI both before and after counseling. Anxiety levels did not change significantly after counseling or during the first trimester of pregnancy. 83.4% would recommend preconception counseling to others. Conclusion: Preconception counseling is valued by the majority of women and men and does not lead to adverse psychological effects. Copyrigh
Uniform Registration Agreements on Cholesteatoma Care: A Nationwide Consensus Procedure
Background: To coordinate and align the content for
registration of cholesteatoma care.
Methods: Systematic Delphi consensus procedure, consisting
three rounds: two written sessions followed by a face-to-face
meeting. Before this procedure, input on important patient
outcomes was obtained. Consensus was defined as at least
80% agreement by participants. Hundred-thirty-six adult
patients who had undergone cholesteatoma surgery and
all ENT surgeons of the Dutch ENT Society were invited. The
consensus rounds were att
Feedback preferences of patients, professionals and health insurers in integrated head and neck cancer care
Background: Audit and feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes are the most often used interventions to change behaviour of professionals and improve quality of health care. However, limited information is available regarding preferred feedback for patients, professionals and health insurers. Objective: Investigate the (differences in) preferences of receiving feedback between stakeholders, using the Dutch Head and Neck Audit as an example. Methods: A total of 37 patients, medical specialists, allied health professionals and health insurers were interviewed using semi-structured interviews. Questions focussed on: “Why,” “On what aspects” and “How” do you prefer to receive feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes?. Results: All stakeholders mentioned that feedback can improve health care by creating awareness, enabling self-reflection and reflection on peers or colleagues, and by benchmarking to others. Patients prefer feedback on the actual professional practice that matches the health care received, whereas medical specialists and health insurers are interested mainly in health care outcomes. All stakeholders largely prefer a bar graph. Patients prefer a pie chart for patient-reported outcomes and experiences, while Kaplan-Meier survival curves are preferred by medical specialists. Feedback should be simple with firstly an overview, and 1-4 times a year sent by e-mail. Finally, patients and health professionals are cautious with regard to transparency of audit data. Conclusions: This exploratory study shows how feedback preferences differ between stakeholders. Therefore, tailored reports are recommended. Using this information, effects of audit and feedback can be improved by adapting the feedback format and contents to the preferences of stakeholders