Satisfaction of Individuals Living with Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Gastroenterology Care Providers with Telephone Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background: People living with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) require regular medical follow-up, which could be challenging for individuals living in rural areas and those who have limited access to specialized care. Telephone care (TC) could improve health care by increasing access to specialized care and decreasing the strain of travel and time to see a consultant. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic increased the usage of TC appointments in Canada including Saskatchewan. There are no validated questionnaires to measure satisfaction with TC among individuals living with IBD and gastrointestinal care providers (GCPs). In addition, there is limited evidence around the levels and factors associated with satisfaction with TC among individuals with IBD. Purpose: This study aimed to adapt and validate a questionnaire to evaluate the satisfaction of individuals living with IBD and GCPs with TC, and to evaluate the factors associated with TC satisfaction among individuals living with IBD in Saskatchewan, Canada. Methods: The Telehealth Usability Questionnaire was adapted to the IBD TC context by a committee of experts. Two questionnaires were generated - the Telephone Care Satisfaction Questionnaire (TCSQ) for individuals living with IBD (IBD-TCSQ-patient) and GCPs (IBD-TCSQ-provider). A pilot study among GCPs and IBD individuals assessed the readability and usability of the questionnaire items. Subsequently, between December 2021 and April 2022, individuals living with IBD in Saskatchewan and GCPs completed an online survey with, respectively, the TCSQ-patient and IBD-TCSQ-provider questionnaires. For individuals with IBD, the online survey also included the Quality of Care Through the Patient’s Eyes-IBD (QUOTE-IBD) questionnaire, Short Inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire (SIBDQ), and demographic questions. Data were analyzed using descriptive and correlational techniques. Psychometric analysis was conducted to examine the reliability and validity of the IBD-TCSQ-patient. Factors associated with TC satisfaction were explored using linear regression models. A backward model-building strategy was used, and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were reported. Results: The IBD-TCSQ-patient and IBD-TCSQ-provider questionnaires were developed, each with 16 individual items and one question on global TC satisfaction. The pilot study demonstrated good readability and usability of the questionnaires. Then, 87 IBD individuals completed the IBD-TCSQ-patient questionnaire and six GCPs the IBD-TCSQ-provider questionnaire. The standardized level of TC satisfaction for the 16-item IBD-TCSQ-patient was 5.70 (SD=0.94) on a scale from 1.00 to 7.00. The IBD-TCSQ-patient had optimal internal reliability (α=0.96). Two dimensions were identified in the exploratory factor analysis of the IBD-TCSQ-patient questionnaire (i.e., usefulness and convenience). Adjusting by gender, age group, type of disease, and health care provider managing IBD, the satisfaction with TC was 0.48 (95%CI 0.02-0.94) higher among individuals with IBD living in rural Saskatchewan in comparison to their urban counterparts. Conclusion: Questionnaires to measure satisfaction with TC among individuals with IBD and GCPs were developed. Good validity and reliability of the IBD-TCSQ-patient were confirmed. This questionnaire could help identify opportunities for TC improvement and thereby improve utilization among individuals living with IBD. Individuals living with IBD in Saskatchewan reported high levels of satisfaction with TC. Rural residence is associated with higher levels of TC satisfaction. These results could help in the promotion of TC utilization and improve access to specialized IBD care, especially among those living in rural areas.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".