Literature DB >> 22040039

General practitioners' experience and benefits from patient evaluations.

Hanne N Heje1, Peter Vedsted, Frede Olesen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It has now for many years been recognised that patient evaluations should be undertaken as an integral part of the complex task of improving the quality of general practice care. Yet little is known about the general practitioners' (GPs') benefit from patient evaluations. Aim 1 was to study the impact on the GPs of a patient evaluation and subsequent feedback of results presented at a plenary session comprising a study guide for the results and group discussions. Aim 2 was to study possible facilitators and barriers to the implementations of the results raised by the patient evaluation process.
METHODS: A patient evaluation survey of 597 voluntarily participating GPs was performed by means of the EUROPEP questionnaire. Evaluation results were fed back to the GPs as written reports at a single feedback meeting with group discussions of the results. Between 3 and 17 months after the feedback, the 597 GPs received a questionnaire with items addressing their experience with and perceived benefit from the evaluations.
RESULTS: 79.4% of the GPs responded. 33% of the responding GPs reported that the patient evaluation had raised their attention to the patient perspective on the quality of general practice care. Job satisfaction had improved among 26%, and 21% had developed a more positive attitude to patient evaluations. 77% of the GPs reported having learnt from the evaluation. 54% had made changes to improve practice, 82% would recommend a patient evaluation to a colleague and 75% would do another patient evaluation if invited. 14% of the GPs had become less positive towards patient evaluations, and job satisfaction had decreased among 3%.
CONCLUSIONS: We found a significant impact on the GPs regarding satisfaction with the process and attitude towards patient evaluations, GPs' attention to the patients' perspective on care quality and their job satisfaction. Being benchmarked against the average seemed to raise barriers to the concept of patient evaluations and difficulties interpreting the results may have formed a barrier to their implementation which was partly overcome by adding qualitative data to the quantitative results. The GPs' significant willingness to share and discuss the results with others may have served as a facilitator.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22040039      PMCID: PMC3217866          DOI: 10.1186/1471-2296-12-116

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Fam Pract        ISSN: 1471-2296            Impact factor:   2.497


  20 in total

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

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

2.  Clinician mindfulness and patient safety.

Authors:  Erica M S Sibinga; Albert W Wu
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-12-08       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Continuous improvement as an ideal in health care.

Authors:  D M Berwick
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-01-05       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  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

Review 5.  Diffusion, dissemination, and implementation: who should do what?

Authors:  J Lomas
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  1993-12-31       Impact factor: 5.691

6.  Multiple significance tests: the Bonferroni method.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-01-21

7.  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

8.  Comparison of patients' preferences and evaluations regarding aspects of general practice care.

Authors:  H Jung; M Wensing; A de Wilt; F Olesen; R Grol
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.267

9.  Patient satisfaction--does it matter?

Authors:  H Vuori
Journal:  Qual Assur Health Care       Date:  1991

10.  Satisfaction, compliance and communication.

Authors:  P Ley
Journal:  Br J Clin Psychol       Date:  1982-11
View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Understanding and Using Patient Experience Feedback to Improve Health Care Quality: Systematic Review and Framework Development.

Authors:  Emmanuel Kumah; Felix Osei-Kesse; Cynthia Anaba
Journal:  J Patient Cent Res Rev       Date:  2017-01-31

Review 2.  Effectiveness of empathy in general practice: a systematic review.

Authors:  Frans Derksen; Jozien Bensing; Antoine Lagro-Janssen
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  Challenges to the credibility of patient feedback in primary healthcare settings: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Anthea Asprey; John L Campbell; Jenny Newbould; Simon Cohn; Mary Carter; Antoinette Davey; Martin Roland
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Physicians' perceptions about the quality of primary health care services in transitional Albania.

Authors:  Neritan Kellici; Arvin Dibra; Joana Mihani; Suela Kellici; Genc Burazeri
Journal:  Med Arch       Date:  2015-04-06

5.  Public assessment of key performance indicators of healthcare in a Canadian province: the effect of age and chronic health problems.

Authors:  Abu Sadat Nurullah; Herbert C Northcott; Michael D Harvey
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2014-01-15

6.  Patient and public involvement in medical performance processes: A systematic review.

Authors:  Mirza Lalani; Rebecca Baines; Marie Bryce; Martin Marshall; Sol Mead; Stephen Barasi; Julian Archer; Samantha Regan de Bere
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2018-12-11       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Made to Measure: The Ethics of Routine Measurement for Healthcare Improvement.

Authors:  Polly Mitchell; Alan Cribb; Vikki Entwistle
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2020-12-20

8.  Exploring the impact and use of patients' feedback about their care experiences in general practice settings-a realist synthesis.

Authors:  Deborah J Baldie; Bruce Guthrie; Vikki Entwistle; Thilo Kroll
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 2.267

9.  The Norwegian patient experiences with GP questionnaire (PEQ-GP): reliability and construct validity following a national survey.

Authors:  Olaf Holmboe; Hilde Hestad Iversen; Kirsten Danielsen; Oyvind Bjertnaes
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-10-02       Impact factor: 2.692

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.