Literature DB >> 18494960

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

Elizabeth Davies1, Dale Shaller, Susan Edgman-Levitan, Dana G Safran, Gary Oftedahl, John Sakowski, Paul D Cleary.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the use of a modified Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey to support quality improvement in a collaborative focused on patient-centred care, assess subsequent changes in patient experiences, and identify factors that promoted or impeded data use.
BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems are increasingly using surveys to assess patients' experiences of care but little is established about how to use these data in quality improvement.
DESIGN: Process evaluation of a quality improvement collaborative. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The CAHPS team from Harvard Medical School and the Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement organized a learning collaborative including eight medical groups in Minnesota. INTERVENTION: Samples of patients recently visiting each group completed a modified CAHPS survey before, after and continuously over a 12-month project. Teams were encouraged to set goals for improvement using baseline data and supported as they made interventions with bi-monthly collaborative meetings, an online tool reporting the monthly data, a resource manual called The CAHPS Improvement Guide, and conference calls. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in patient experiences. Interviews with team leaders assessed the usefulness of the collaborative resources, lessons and barriers to using data.
RESULTS: Seven teams set goals and six made interventions. Small improvements in patient experience were observed in some groups, but in others changes were mixed and not consistently related to the team actions. Two successful groups appeared to have strong quality improvement structures and had focussed on relatively simple interventions. Team leaders reported that frequent survey reports were a powerful stimulus to improvement, but that they needed more time and support to engage staff and clinicians in changing their behaviour.
CONCLUSIONS: Small measurable improvements in patient experience may be achieved over short projects. Sustaining more substantial change is likely to require organizational strategies, engaged leadership, cultural change, regular measurement and performance feedback and experience of interpreting and using survey data.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18494960      PMCID: PMC5060434          DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00483.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  19 in total

1.  The use of cognitive testing to develop and evaluate CAHPS 1.0 core survey items. Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study.

Authors:  L D Harris-Kojetin; F J Fowler; J A Brown; J A Schnaier; S F Sweeny
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Seeking consumer views: what use are results of hospital patient satisfaction surveys?

Authors:  M Draper; P Cohen; H Buchan
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 2.038

3.  Medscape's response to the Institute of Medicine Report: Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century.

Authors:  M Leavitt
Journal:  MedGenMed       Date:  2001-03-05

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

Authors:  Michel Wensing; Eric Vingerhoets; Richard Grol
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2003-10

5.  Comparison of performance of traditional Medicare vs Medicare managed care.

Authors:  Bruce E Landon; Alan M Zaslavsky; Shulamit L Bernard; Matthew J Cioffi; Paul D Cleary
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-04-14       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Using patient feedback for quality improvement.

Authors:  K Tasa; G R Baker; M Murray
Journal:  Qual Manag Health Care       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 0.926

7.  Meeting patients' needs: quality care in a changing environment.

Authors:  L Rogut; A Hudson
Journal:  Pap Ser United Hosp Fund N Y       Date:  1995-11

8.  Feedback of patients' evaluations of general practice care: a randomised trial.

Authors:  E Vingerhoets; M Wensing; R Grol
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2001-12

9.  Impact of patient feedback on the interpersonal skills of general practice registrars: results of a longitudinal study.

Authors:  M Greco; A Brownlea; J McGovern
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 6.251

10.  Measurement of outpatients' views of service quality in a Finnish university hospital.

Authors:  Hannele Hiidenhovi; Kaija Nojonen; Pekka Laippala
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.187

View more
  52 in total

1.  Assessing the utility of consumer surveys for improving the quality of behavioral health care services.

Authors:  J Randy Koch; Alison B Breland; Mary Nash; Karen Cropsey
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 1.505

2.  Examining the role of patient experience surveys in measuring health care quality.

Authors:  Rebecca Anhang Price; Marc N Elliott; Alan M Zaslavsky; Ron D Hays; William G Lehrman; Lise Rybowski; Susan Edgman-Levitan; Paul D Cleary
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 3.929

3.  Do Experiences with Medicare Managed Care Vary According to the Proportion of Same-Race/Ethnicity/Language Individuals Enrolled in One's Contract?

Authors:  Rebecca Anhang Price; Amelia M Haviland; Katrin Hambarsoomian; Jacob W Dembosky; Sarah Gaillot; Robert Weech-Maldonado; Malcolm V Williams; Marc N Elliott
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-03-09       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Randomized Trial of Reducing Ambulatory Malpractice and Safety Risk: Results of the Massachusetts PROMISES Project.

Authors:  Gordon D Schiff; Harry Reyes Nieva; Paula Griswold; Nicholas Leydon; Judy Ling; Frank Federico; Carol Keohane; Bonnie R Ellis; Cathy Foskett; E John Orav; Catherine Yoon; Don Goldmann; Joel S Weissman; David W Bates; Madeleine Biondolillo; Sara J Singer
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Assessing Patient-Centered Communication in Cancer Care: Measures for Surveillance of Communication Outcomes.

Authors:  Richard L Street; Kathleen M Mazor; Neeraj K Arora
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2016-09-30       Impact factor: 3.840

6.  Differences in Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Clinician and Group Survey Scores by Recency of the Last Visit: Implications for Comparability of Periodic and Continuous Sampling.

Authors:  Claude M Setodji; Q Burkhart; Ron D Hays; Denise D Quigley; Samuel A Skootsky; Marc N Elliott
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  Examining patients' perceptions of care to identify opportunities for quality improvement in psychiatric inpatient hospitals.

Authors:  Glorimar Ortiz
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 8.  Change what? Identifying quality improvement targets by investigating usual mental health care.

Authors:  Ann F Garland; Leonard Bickman; Bruce F Chorpita
Journal:  Adm Policy Ment Health       Date:  2010-03

9.  Usefulness of a national parent experience survey in quality improvement: views of paediatric department employees.

Authors:  Hilde Hestad Iversen; Øyvind Andresen Bjertnæs; Gøril Groven; Geir Bukholm
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2010-05-31

10.  Engagement of groups in family medicine board maintenance of certification.

Authors:  Dena M Fisher; Christopher J Brenner; Mark Cheren; Kurt C Stange
Journal:  J Am Board Fam Med       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.657

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.