M Capuzzo1, F Landi, A Bassani, L Grassi, C A Volta, R Alvisi. 1. Department of Surgical, Anaesthetic and Radiological Sciences., Section of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University Hospital of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy. cpmunife.it
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Questionnaires to evaluate patient satisfaction with anaesthesia mainly consider physiological aspects. This study was performed to identify the items of value for patients having anaesthesia (pilot phase) and to validate the questionnaire built on these findings in a new group of inpatients. METHODS: In the pilot phase, 100 surgical patients were interviewed and asked whether each of the 23 items selected by a panel of providers was relevant (score 1) and to rank these from 1 (additional score 6) to 5 (additional score 2). The resulting 10-item final instrument was administered to 219 consecutive inpatients by interview, after recent anaesthesia, asking them how much of each item they received (item received) and the level of satisfaction with the same item, using Numerical Rating Scales (range 0-10). RESULTS: In the pilot phase, gender, age, education and surgery did not influence the score enough to change the first 10 rank-ordered items. The 219 patients subsequently studied did not differ from those missing the questionnaire administration. The patients aged less than 55 years showed lower satisfaction scores than those aged 55 years or more (P = 0.019). In all items, except 'feeling anxious/frightened', the item received was significantly associated with the satisfaction reported. 'Kindness/regard of caregivers' together with 'information given by anaesthetist' and 'feeling safe' predicted 47% of the variance in total patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Inpatients value highly those elements of care that pertain to emotional and interpersonal relationships.
BACKGROUND: Questionnaires to evaluate patient satisfaction with anaesthesia mainly consider physiological aspects. This study was performed to identify the items of value for patients having anaesthesia (pilot phase) and to validate the questionnaire built on these findings in a new group of inpatients. METHODS: In the pilot phase, 100 surgical patients were interviewed and asked whether each of the 23 items selected by a panel of providers was relevant (score 1) and to rank these from 1 (additional score 6) to 5 (additional score 2). The resulting 10-item final instrument was administered to 219 consecutive inpatients by interview, after recent anaesthesia, asking them how much of each item they received (item received) and the level of satisfaction with the same item, using Numerical Rating Scales (range 0-10). RESULTS: In the pilot phase, gender, age, education and surgery did not influence the score enough to change the first 10 rank-ordered items. The 219 patients subsequently studied did not differ from those missing the questionnaire administration. The patients aged less than 55 years showed lower satisfaction scores than those aged 55 years or more (P = 0.019). In all items, except 'feeling anxious/frightened', the item received was significantly associated with the satisfaction reported. 'Kindness/regard of caregivers' together with 'information given by anaesthetist' and 'feeling safe' predicted 47% of the variance in total patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Inpatients value highly those elements of care that pertain to emotional and interpersonal relationships.
Authors: Kira-Lee Koster; Carolin Björklund; Sebastian Fenner; Wolfgang Johann Flierler; Michael Laupheimer; Katharina Burri; Matthias Nübling; Thomas Heidegger Journal: Anaesthesiologie Date: 2022-08-29