English   español  
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/49368
Share/Impact:
Statistics
logo share SHARE logo core CORE   Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE

Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Exportar a otros formatos:

Title

Percutaneous liver biopsy: patients' point of view

AuthorsFernández-Salazar, Luis; Garrote, José Antonio
KeywordsHealth-economy
Hepatobiliary-clinical
Hepatitis-viral
Issue DateJun-2011
PublisherInforma Healthcare
CitationScandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology 46(6): 727-731 (2011)
Abstract[Introduction]: Hepatic fibrosis can be assessed through serum markers or by the implementation of new non-invasive techniques, such as elastography. We must know patients' opinion on percutaneous liver biopsy (PLB) when it comes to comparing it with other procedures. [Aims]: To know the point of view of patients undergoing a PLB with regard to information provided to them, as well as the procedures and biopsy consequences. [Patients and methods]: A questionnaire was sent by mail to 178 patients who underwent PLB from April 2006 to May 2010. Answers were analyzed. Results are expressed in percentages and compared based on gender and age (younger or older than 47 years of age) (Chi-square test). [Results]: Ninety patients of the group answered, 44 females, mean age 47 ± 12 years. The answers revealed that 93% of patients rated the information concerning the reasons for a PLB as adequate (86% women and 100% men). As for the information concerning the objective of the procedure, 88% of patients regarded it as adequate (81% of women vs. 93% of men, p = 0.08). As for the information concerning the risks of a biopsy, 77.7% see it as sufficient. About 12.20% of patients did not receive any information on the physician who asked for the PLB, or who performed it. PLB was considered very painful by 14% of patients, painful by 21%, bothersome by 41.1% and barely bothersome by 23% of patients. Thirty-five percent of patients required analgesia after the puncture. Even though 92% of patients regard PLB as a useful procedure, 46% of them have not received any treatment or a different nutritional regime (55.8%, among those older than 47 years of age, p = 0.03). Eighty percent of patients think that PLB has more benefits than drawbacks, although 87% would have opted for a less aggressive technique as long as it would have provided the same information. But 21% of patients would have also preferred a less aggressive technique, even though it provided fewer details. [Conclusions]: In general, PLB is widely approved by patients and is also regarded as a useful procedure. One out of six patients would rather choose a less-aggressive technique even if it provided less information. PLB does not involve changes in the treatment in around a half of patients.
Description5 páginas.-- et al.
Publisher version (URL)http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/00365521.2011.558112
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/49368
DOI10.3109/00365521.2011.558112
ISSN0036-5521
E-ISSN1502-7708
Appears in Collections:(IBGM) Artículos
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Show full item record
Review this work
 

Related articles:


WARNING: Items in Digital.CSIC are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.