OBJECTIVE: To compare patient satisfaction in women's clinics (WCs) versus traditional primary care clinics (TCs). DESIGN: Anonymous, cross-sectional mailed survey. SETTING: Eight Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers in 3 states. PATIENTS: A random sample of women stratified by site and enrollment in WC versus TC (total response rate = 61%). MEASURES: Overall satisfaction and gender-specific satisfaction as measured by the Primary Care Satisfaction Survey for Women (PCSSW). ANALYSIS: We dichotomized the satisfaction scores (excellent versus all other), and compared excellent satisfaction in WCs versus TCs using logistic regression, controlling for demographics, health status, health care use, and location. RESULTS: Women enrolled in WCs were more likely than those in TCs to report excellent overall satisfaction (odds ratio, 1.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.00 to 2.02; P = .05). Multivariate models demonstrated that receipt of care in WCs was a significant positive predictor for all 5 satisfaction domains (i.e., getting care, privacy and comfort, communication, complete care, and follow-up care) with the gender-specific satisfaction instrument (PCSSW). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to consistently show higher satisfaction in WCs versus TCs despite age and race differences and comparable health status. Since these WCs show better quality in terms of satisfaction, other quality indicators should be evaluated. If WCs reduce fragmentation and improve health care delivery, the model will be applicable in VA and non-VA outpatient settings.
OBJECTIVE: To compare patient satisfaction in women's clinics (WCs) versus traditional primary care clinics (TCs). DESIGN: Anonymous, cross-sectional mailed survey. SETTING: Eight Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers in 3 states. PATIENTS: A random sample of women stratified by site and enrollment in WC versus TC (total response rate = 61%). MEASURES: Overall satisfaction and gender-specific satisfaction as measured by the Primary Care Satisfaction Survey for Women (PCSSW). ANALYSIS: We dichotomized the satisfaction scores (excellent versus all other), and compared excellent satisfaction in WCs versus TCs using logistic regression, controlling for demographics, health status, health care use, and location. RESULTS:Women enrolled in WCs were more likely than those in TCs to report excellent overall satisfaction (odds ratio, 1.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.00 to 2.02; P = .05). Multivariate models demonstrated that receipt of care in WCs was a significant positive predictor for all 5 satisfaction domains (i.e., getting care, privacy and comfort, communication, complete care, and follow-up care) with the gender-specific satisfaction instrument (PCSSW). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to consistently show higher satisfaction in WCs versus TCs despite age and race differences and comparable health status. Since these WCs show better quality in terms of satisfaction, other quality indicators should be evaluated. If WCs reduce fragmentation and improve health care delivery, the model will be applicable in VA and non-VA outpatient settings.
Authors: Nancy L Keating; Diane C Green; Audiey C Kao; Julie A Gazmararian; Vivian Y Wu; Paul D Cleary Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: N Milliken; K Freund; J Pregler; S Reed; K Carlson; R Derman; A Zerr; M Battistini; S Bowman; J H Magnus; G E Sarto; J T Chambers; M McLaughlin Journal: J Womens Health Gend Based Med Date: 2001-09
Authors: Caroline L Goldzweig; Talene M Balekian; Cony Rolón; Elizabeth M Yano; Paul G Shekelle Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Rachel Kimerling; Lori A Bastian; Bevanne A Bean-Mayberry; Meggan M Bucossi; Diane V Carney; Karen M Goldstein; Ciaran S Phibbs; Alyssa Pomernacki; Anne G Sadler; Elizabeth M Yano; Susan M Frayne Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2014-11-17 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Emmeline Chuang; Julian Brunner; Selene Mak; Alison B Hamilton; Ismelda Canelo; Jill Darling; Lisa V Rubenstein; Elizabeth M Yano Journal: Womens Health Issues Date: 2017-01-04
Authors: Serena MacDonald; Colleen Judge-Golden; Sonya Borrero; Xinhua Zhao; Maria K Mor; Leslie R M Hausmann Journal: Med Care Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Rita Mangione-Smith; Chuan Zhou; Jeffrey D Robinson; James A Taylor; Marc N Elliott; John Heritage Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2015 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Bevanne Bean-Mayberry; Elizabeth M Yano; Maria K Mor; Nichole K Bayliss; Xiangyan Xu; Michael J Fine Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2009-06-08 Impact factor: 5.562