INTRODUCTION: Evaluation of patient satisfaction with the perioperative care is an integral part of modern quality management. For this purpose simple questioning techniques are often used in clinical practise or reports of clinical trials. However, little research has been performed to investigate whether these tools and methods are useful and provide valid information. METHODS:Two-hundred patients undergoing elective surgical procedures were interviewed. Five different simple techniques or questions that have been used in the international and in the German literature throughout the last years were applied in random sequence together with the validated German translation of the QoR-9 questionnaire to measure quality of recovery. All analyses were performed descriptively. RESULTS: All investigated techniques could be answered without help by another person in 95 % up to 100 %. All simple dichotomous questions regarding satisfaction were insufficient to discriminate satisfied from less satisfied patients. A rating using grades known from the German school system (1 - 6) and a visual analogue scale (VAS; 0 - 100 mm) obtained ratings lower than the maximum possible values in 10 % and 11 % of the patients respectively. Furthermore, the flexibility that was provided by these tools was not utilized by the patients. The results of the QoR-9 questionnaire as a marker of postoperative recovery showed only a moderate correlation with ratings of patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Until now, there is no method or questioning technique in the German language that can be recommended for a quality assurance program. Thus, further research is needed to develop tools that provide valid information with adequate resolution to allow discrimination of patient satisfaction with perioperative care.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Evaluation of patient satisfaction with the perioperative care is an integral part of modern quality management. For this purpose simple questioning techniques are often used in clinical practise or reports of clinical trials. However, little research has been performed to investigate whether these tools and methods are useful and provide valid information. METHODS: Two-hundred patients undergoing elective surgical procedures were interviewed. Five different simple techniques or questions that have been used in the international and in the German literature throughout the last years were applied in random sequence together with the validated German translation of the QoR-9 questionnaire to measure quality of recovery. All analyses were performed descriptively. RESULTS: All investigated techniques could be answered without help by another person in 95 % up to 100 %. All simple dichotomous questions regarding satisfaction were insufficient to discriminate satisfied from less satisfied patients. A rating using grades known from the German school system (1 - 6) and a visual analogue scale (VAS; 0 - 100 mm) obtained ratings lower than the maximum possible values in 10 % and 11 % of the patients respectively. Furthermore, the flexibility that was provided by these tools was not utilized by the patients. The results of the QoR-9 questionnaire as a marker of postoperative recovery showed only a moderate correlation with ratings of patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Until now, there is no method or questioning technique in the German language that can be recommended for a quality assurance program. Thus, further research is needed to develop tools that provide valid information with adequate resolution to allow discrimination of patient satisfaction with perioperative care.
Authors: A M Morin; M Pandurovic; L H J Eberhart; S Wagner; C Kunz; W Nüssle; P Geiger; H-H Mehrkens Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 1.041