BACKGROUND: The complexity of health information frequently exceeds patients' skills to understand and use it. Improvement in hospital communication has the potential to improve the quality of care. OBJECTIVE: To develop a set of items to supplement the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Hospital Survey (HCAHPS) to assess how well hospitals communicate health information to inpatients. METHODS: We conducted an environmental scan and obtained input from stakeholders to identify domains and survey items, and cognitively tested the item set in English and Spanish. We administered the items to a random sample of adult hospital patients using mail and telephone data collection. We estimate item-scale correlations for hypothesized multi-item composites, internal consistency reliability for composites, correlations among composites, and regressed global rating of the hospital and a would you recommend the hospital items on HCAHPS existing core and the new composites to evaluate the unique contribution of each to these "bottom-line" measures. RESULTS: A total of 1013 surveys were obtained (55% response rate). With some exceptions, correlations between items and scales were consistent with the hypothesized item clusters. Three composites were identified: (1) communication about tests; (2) communication about how to care for self and medicines; and (3) communication about forms. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides support for the measurement properties of the HCAHPS Item Set for Addressing Health Literacy. It can serve as both a measure of whether healthcare providers in a hospital setting have communicated effectively with their patients and as a tool for quality improvement.
BACKGROUND: The complexity of health information frequently exceeds patients' skills to understand and use it. Improvement in hospital communication has the potential to improve the quality of care. OBJECTIVE: To develop a set of items to supplement the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Hospital Survey (HCAHPS) to assess how well hospitals communicate health information to inpatients. METHODS: We conducted an environmental scan and obtained input from stakeholders to identify domains and survey items, and cognitively tested the item set in English and Spanish. We administered the items to a random sample of adult hospital patients using mail and telephone data collection. We estimate item-scale correlations for hypothesized multi-item composites, internal consistency reliability for composites, correlations among composites, and regressed global rating of the hospital and a would you recommend the hospital items on HCAHPS existing core and the new composites to evaluate the unique contribution of each to these "bottom-line" measures. RESULTS: A total of 1013 surveys were obtained (55% response rate). With some exceptions, correlations between items and scales were consistent with the hypothesized item clusters. Three composites were identified: (1) communication about tests; (2) communication about how to care for self and medicines; and (3) communication about forms. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides support for the measurement properties of the HCAHPS Item Set for Addressing Health Literacy. It can serve as both a measure of whether healthcare providers in a hospital setting have communicated effectively with their patients and as a tool for quality improvement.
Authors: R D Hays; J A Shaul; V S Williams; J S Lubalin; L D Harris-Kojetin; S F Sweeny; P D Cleary Journal: Med Care Date: 1999-03 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Howard K Koh; Donald M Berwick; Carolyn M Clancy; Cynthia Baur; Cindy Brach; Linda M Harris; Eileen G Zerhusen Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2012-01-18 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Laura A Giordano; Marc N Elliott; Elizabeth Goldstein; William G Lehrman; Patrice A Spencer Journal: Med Care Res Rev Date: 2009-07-28 Impact factor: 3.929
Authors: Nancy D Berkman; Stacey L Sheridan; Katrina E Donahue; David J Halpern; Karen Crotty Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2011-07-19 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Brian W Jack; Veerappa K Chetty; David Anthony; Jeffrey L Greenwald; Gail M Sanchez; Anna E Johnson; Shaula R Forsythe; Julie K O'Donnell; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Christopher Manasseh; Stephen Martin; Larry Culpepper Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2009-02-03 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Arjan G J Bot; Stijn Bekkers; Paul M Arnstein; R Malcolm Smith; David Ring Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2014-04-29 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Sarah F Feldman; Nathanael Lapidus; Jacques Cosnes; Emmanuel Tiret; Laurent Fonquernie; Jean Cabane; Olivier Chazouilleres; Laure Surgers; Marc Beaussier; Alain-Jacques Valleron; Fabrice Carrat; Gilles Hejblum Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Brian Chan; Samuel T Edwards; Meg Devoe; Richard Gil; Matthew Mitchell; Honora Englander; Christina Nicolaidis; Devan Kansagara; Somnath Saha; P Todd Korthuis Journal: Addict Sci Clin Pract Date: 2018-12-14
Authors: Angela G Brega; Mika K Hamer; Karen Albright; Cindy Brach; Debra Saliba; Dana Abbey; R Mark Gritz Journal: Health Lit Res Pract Date: 2019-07-01
Authors: Daitao Zhang; Shuangsheng Wu; Yi Zhang; Peng Yang; C Raina MacIntyre; Holly Seale; Quanyi Wang Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-08-19 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Patrizio Zanobini; Chiara Lorini; Alberto Baldasseroni; Claudia Dellisanti; Guglielmo Bonaccorsi Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-02-06 Impact factor: 3.390