BACKGROUND: Sickle cell disease (SCD) patients can receive their ambulatory care from either SCD specialists (caregivers with sickle cell-only clinics) or nonspecialized care centers. Patient satisfaction, an important factor that may influence compliance and outcome, can differ between the two groups because of the perceived quality of care, outcomes or practice style. METHODS: We administered a patient satisfaction survey to 308 participants in an SCD prospective cohort study. Of the 308 patients, 133 (43.2%) received the majority of their SCD care at specialized centers, 152 (49.3%) received their care from nonspecialized centers and 26 (7.5) did not provide information. The satisfaction surveys measured general satisfaction (GS), technical quality (TQ), interpersonal manner (IM), communication (CM), financial aspects (FA), time spent with doctor (TA), and accessibility and convenience (AC). Patients reported their levels of satisfaction using a five-point Likert scale. We compared unadjusted group means, as well as means adjusted for potential confounders such as marital status, on patient satisfaction between specialized and nonspecialized centers. RESULTS: SCD patients who received their care from specialized centers had significantly higher mean satisfaction scores, compared to those who received their care from nonspecialized centers: GS 4.00(+/-0.93) vs. 3.66 (+/- 01.16, p=0.0326), TQ 3.98 (+/- 0.77) vs. 3.65 (+/- 0.91, p=0.0058), AC 3.83 (+/-0.79) vs. 3.51 (+/- 1.02, p=0.0142) , FA 3.88 (+/-0.96) vs. 3.49 (+/-1.25, p=0.0120). There were no statistically significant group differences in IM, TA and CM. CONCLUSION: SCD patients who received most of their SCD care from specialized centers had somewhat higher satisfaction scores in some areas when compared with patients who received their care from nonspecialized centers.
BACKGROUND:Sickle cell disease (SCD) patients can receive their ambulatory care from either SCD specialists (caregivers with sickle cell-only clinics) or nonspecialized care centers. Patient satisfaction, an important factor that may influence compliance and outcome, can differ between the two groups because of the perceived quality of care, outcomes or practice style. METHODS: We administered a patient satisfaction survey to 308 participants in an SCD prospective cohort study. Of the 308 patients, 133 (43.2%) received the majority of their SCD care at specialized centers, 152 (49.3%) received their care from nonspecialized centers and 26 (7.5) did not provide information. The satisfaction surveys measured general satisfaction (GS), technical quality (TQ), interpersonal manner (IM), communication (CM), financial aspects (FA), time spent with doctor (TA), and accessibility and convenience (AC). Patients reported their levels of satisfaction using a five-point Likert scale. We compared unadjusted group means, as well as means adjusted for potential confounders such as marital status, on patient satisfaction between specialized and nonspecialized centers. RESULTS:SCDpatients who received their care from specialized centers had significantly higher mean satisfaction scores, compared to those who received their care from nonspecialized centers: GS 4.00(+/-0.93) vs. 3.66 (+/- 01.16, p=0.0326), TQ 3.98 (+/- 0.77) vs. 3.65 (+/- 0.91, p=0.0058), AC 3.83 (+/-0.79) vs. 3.51 (+/- 1.02, p=0.0142) , FA 3.88 (+/-0.96) vs. 3.49 (+/-1.25, p=0.0120). There were no statistically significant group differences in IM, TA and CM. CONCLUSION:SCDpatients who received most of their SCD care from specialized centers had somewhat higher satisfaction scores in some areas when compared with patients who received their care from nonspecialized centers.
Authors: John D Birkmeyer; Andrea E Siewers; Emily V A Finlayson; Therese A Stukel; F Lee Lucas; Ida Batista; H Gilbert Welch; David E Wennberg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-04-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: K L O'Brien; A J Swift; J A Winkelstein; M Santosham; B Stover; R Luddy; J E Gootenberg; J T Nold; A Eskenazi; S J Snader; H M Lederman Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Jori E May; Patrick C Irelan; Kailee Boedeker; Emily Cahill; Steven Fein; David A Garcia; Lisa K Hicks; Janice Lawson; Ming Y Lim; Colleen T Morton; Anita Rajasekhar; Satish Shanbhag; Marc S Zumberg; Robert M Plovnick; Nathan T Connell Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2020-09-22
Authors: Miriam O Ezenwa; Robert E Molokie; Zaijie Jim Wang; Marie L Suarez; Yingwei Yao; Diana J Wilkie Journal: J Adv Nurs Date: 2015-04-27 Impact factor: 3.187
Authors: Carlton Haywood; Shawn Bediako; Sophie Lanzkron; Marie Diener-West; John Strouse; Jennifer Haythornthwaite; Gladys Onojobi; Mary Catherine Beach Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2014-05-23
Authors: Maite E Houwing; Marit Buddenbaum; Thijs C J Verheul; Anne P J de Pagter; Jacobus N J Philipsen; Jan A Hazelzet; Marjon H Cnossen Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2021-03-12 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Samuel N Rodgers-Melnick; Lucas Lin; Kristina Gam; Evanilda Souza de Santana Carvalho; Coretta Jenerette; Douglas Y Rowland; Jane A Little; Jeffery A Dusek; Nitya Bakshi; Lakshmanan Krishnamurti Journal: J Pain Res Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 3.133