Literature DB >> 16272420

Comparison of mail and telephone in assessing patient experiences in receiving care from medical group practices.

Kimberly A Hepner1, Julie A Brown, Ron D Hays.   

Abstract

The medical group survey from the CAHPS (formerly Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study) project, G-CAHPS, focuses on patient experiences in receiving care from their medical group practice. We compared mail and telephone responses to the G-CAHPS survey in a sample of 880 patients from four physician groups. Patients were randomly assigned to mode. Analyses included comparison of response rates, missing data, internal consistency reliability of six multi-item scales, and mean scores. A total of 537 phone completes and 343 mail completes were obtained (54% response rate). There were no significant differences in internal consistency by mode. In addition, there was only one significant mode difference in item and composite means by mode of administration after adjusting for case-mix differences. This study indicates that mail and telephone modes of data collection for the G-CAHPS survey produce similar results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16272420     DOI: 10.1177/0163278705281074

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eval Health Prof        ISSN: 0163-2787            Impact factor:   2.651


  11 in total

1.  Equivalence of mail and telephone responses to the CAHPS Hospital Survey.

Authors:  Han de Vries; Marc N Elliott; Kimberly A Hepner; San D Keller; Ron D Hays
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Comparing colorectal cancer screening and immunization status in older americans.

Authors:  Carrie N Klabunde; Helen I Meissner; Karen G Wooten; Nancy Breen; James A Singleton
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 5.043

3.  Logistics of collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical practice: an overview and practical examples.

Authors:  Matthias Rose; Andrea Bezjak
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-01-20       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  The effect of response scale, administration mode, and format on responses to the CAHPS Clinician and Group survey.

Authors:  Keith M Drake; J Lee Hargraves; Stephanie Lloyd; Patricia M Gallagher; Paul D Cleary
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Collecting data by telephone from low-income African Americans.

Authors:  Nancy T Artinian; Doris Denison; Cheryl K Nordstrom
Journal:  Appl Nurs Res       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 2.257

6.  Telephone-based assessments to minimize missing data in longitudinal depression trials: a project IMPACTS study report.

Authors:  Cindy Claassen; Ben Kurian; Madhukar H Trivedi; Bruce D Grannemann; Ekta Tuli; Ronny Pipes; Anne Marie Preston; Ariell Flood
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2008-08-12       Impact factor: 2.226

7.  Difference in method of administration did not significantly impact item response: an IRT-based analysis from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) initiative.

Authors:  Jakob B Bjorner; Matthias Rose; Barbara Gandek; Arthur A Stone; Doerte U Junghaenel; John E Ware
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-07-23       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Effects of survey mode, patient mix, and nonresponse on CAHPS hospital survey scores.

Authors:  Marc N Elliott; Alan M Zaslavsky; Elizabeth Goldstein; William Lehrman; Katrin Hambarsoomians; Megan K Beckett; Laura Giordano
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.402

9.  Development and preliminary validation of a Greek-language outpatient satisfaction questionnaire with principal components and multi-trait analyses.

Authors:  Vassilis H Aletras; Efthemis A Papadopoulos; Dimitris A Niakas
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-06-06       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Evaluation of patient satisfaction of an outpatient gastroscopy service in an Asian tertiary care hospital.

Authors:  Najib Azmi; Wah-Kheong Chan; Khean-Lee Goh
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-07-28       Impact factor: 3.067

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.