Notre groupe organise plus de 3 000 séries de conférences Événements chaque année aux États-Unis, en Europe et en Europe. Asie avec le soutien de 1 000 autres Sociétés scientifiques et publie plus de 700 Open Access Revues qui contiennent plus de 50 000 personnalités éminentes, des scientifiques réputés en tant que membres du comité de rédaction.

Les revues en libre accès gagnent plus de lecteurs et de citations
700 revues et 15 000 000 de lecteurs Chaque revue attire plus de 25 000 lecteurs

Indexé dans
  • Index Copernic
  • Google Scholar
  • Sherpa Roméo
  • Ouvrir la porte J
  • JournalSeek de génamique
  • Infrastructure nationale du savoir de Chine (CNKI)
  • Bibliothèque de revues électroniques
  • Recherche de référence
  • Université Hamdard
  • EBSCO AZ
  • OCLC-WorldCat
  • Catalogue en ligne SWB
  • Bibliothèque virtuelle de biologie (vifabio)
  • Publons
  • Fondation genevoise pour l'enseignement et la recherche médicale
  • Euro Pub
  • ICMJE
Partager cette page

Abstrait

A Study of Gap Analysis between Perception of the Joint Advisory Group (JAG) and Staff Members of Endoscopy Unit Regarding Quality of Care in UK

Tariq Mahmood and Aung KYI

Introduction: JAG is responsible for accrediting Endoscopy units in the United Kingdom. It inspects the endoscopy units and makes recommendations for meeting quality standards. This study looks at the gap in perception between staff members of the endoscopy unit and JAG with regards to quality in endoscopy. Methods: A questionnaire was designed to measure perception of four outcomes namely; dignity, privacy, quality of endoscopy and resource utilisation. It is a prospective qualitative study. Results: The responses came from 14 Nurses, 6 Health Care Assistant and 1 Receptionist. Altogether a total of 21 questionnaires were received back indicating the response rate of 91.3%. Almost all to more than three quarter (>75%) of the staff felt that changes brought in the endoscopy unit upon recommendations from JAG improved patient dignity, privacy, and quality of care. However roughly a quarter of the staff (23.8%) felt that neither separating admission from discharge bays nor creating gender specific recovery rooms had brought any change at all in the quality of care. Similarly at least 14.3% of staff felt that neither creating gender specific toilets nor separating visitor's room from admissions lounge brought any change to the quality of care. Furthermore, in the perception of 4.8 to 14.4% of the staff members, the effect of this on resource utilisation has been of no consequence.