Literature DB >> 14572944

Feedback based on patient evaluations: a tool for quality improvement?

Michel Wensing1, Eric Vingerhoets, Richard Grol.   

Abstract

Feedback regarding patient evaluations of health care is expected to be a tool for quality improvement. This study examined the response of general practitioners to such feedback in a randomised trial. Practitioners in the intervention group read and discussed the feedback report and then reported on a range of actions that can be undertaken to improve the quality of care. Their communication behaviour was not found to change. All of the practitioners were highly motivated to learn from patient views, both at baseline and after the intervention period. Compared to the control group, the practitioners in the intervention group had less favourable views of the relevance of patient feedback for their practice after the receipt of such feedback. Furthermore, these practitioners felt that a patient survey required considerable time and energy and saw little reason for change. Although patient feedback can help identify areas for improvement, specific barriers must be addressed before such feedback can be put to more widespread use.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14572944     DOI: 10.1016/s0738-3991(02)00199-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  26 in total

1.  Using conjoint analysis to model the preferences of different patient segments for attributes of patient-centered care.

Authors:  Charles E Cunningham; Ken Deal; Heather Rimas; Heather Campbell; Ann Russell; Jennifer Henderson; Anne Matheson; Blake Melnick
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Can patients assess the quality of health care?

Authors:  Angela Coulter
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-07-01

3.  Hearing the patient's voice? Factors affecting the use of patient survey data in quality improvement.

Authors:  E Davies; P D Cleary
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2005-12

4.  Measuring quality through performance. Respecting the subjective: quality measurement from the patient's perspective.

Authors:  Glyn Elwyn; Stephen Buetow; Judith Hibbard; Michel Wensing
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-11-17

5.  Influence of shared medical appointments on patient satisfaction: a retrospective 3-year study.

Authors:  Leonie Heyworth; Ronen Rozenblum; James F Burgess; Errol Baker; Mark Meterko; Debra Prescott; Zeev Neuwirth; Steven R Simon
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 5.166

6.  Health centres' view of the services provided by a university hospital laboratory: use of satisfaction surveys.

Authors:  Paula Oja; Timo Kouri; Arto Pakarinen
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.581

7.  General practitioners' experience and benefits from patient evaluations.

Authors:  Hanne N Heje; Peter Vedsted; Frede Olesen
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2011-10-31       Impact factor: 2.497

8.  Patient satisfaction in outpatient cancer care: a prospective survey using The PASQOC questionnaire.

Authors:  Ulrich R Kleeberg; Petra Feyer; Wolfram Günther; Monika Behrens
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2008-01-17       Impact factor: 3.603

9.  Determining the interviewer effect on CQ Index outcomes: a multilevel approach.

Authors:  Sjenny Winters; Mathilde H Strating; Niek S Klazinga; Rudolf B Kool; Robbert Huijsman
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Evaluating the use of a modified CAHPS survey to support improvements in patient-centred care: lessons from a quality improvement collaborative.

Authors:  Elizabeth Davies; Dale Shaller; Susan Edgman-Levitan; Dana G Safran; Gary Oftedahl; John Sakowski; Paul D Cleary
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.