BACKGROUND: The primary aim of this study was to develop and validate a short psychometric instrument to assess the patient's perception of the quality of anaesthesia. METHODS: In Part 1, the Perception of Quality in Anaesthesia (PQA) questionnaire was developed, pilot tested, and validated. Attributes of high-quality anaesthesia were identified using a process that restricted input to patients and members of the public. In Part 2, patient cohorts completed the PQA before, and after, a 6 month period where anaesthetists were given individualized performance data using questions from the PQA. RESULTS: In Part 1, items in the PQA were identified and ranked by 120 patients and members of the public. Validity and reliability of the PQA was assessed by 714 patients. Principal component analysis showed that the PQA comprised five factors: attention/gentleness; pain management; information/confidence; postoperative nausea or vomiting (PONV); and concerns addressed. In Part 2, there were 2046 patient participants in the pre-feedback cohort, 4251 in the feedback cohort, and 1421 in the post-feedback cohort. Unsatisfactory experience in at least one PQA factor was described by 45.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 43.1-47.4%] during the pre-feedback period, and 35.0% (95% CI 32.6-37.6%) during the post-feedback period. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated a patient-derived questionnaire to measure the patient's perception of anaesthesia quality. PONV, postoperative pain management, and communication with the anaesthetist are the most important features of the patient's experience. Feedback of PQA performance scores to anaesthetists can lead to improved patient experience.
BACKGROUND: The primary aim of this study was to develop and validate a short psychometric instrument to assess the patient's perception of the quality of anaesthesia. METHODS: In Part 1, the Perception of Quality in Anaesthesia (PQA) questionnaire was developed, pilot tested, and validated. Attributes of high-quality anaesthesia were identified using a process that restricted input to patients and members of the public. In Part 2, patient cohorts completed the PQA before, and after, a 6 month period where anaesthetists were given individualized performance data using questions from the PQA. RESULTS: In Part 1, items in the PQA were identified and ranked by 120 patients and members of the public. Validity and reliability of the PQA was assessed by 714 patients. Principal component analysis showed that the PQA comprised five factors: attention/gentleness; pain management; information/confidence; postoperative nausea or vomiting (PONV); and concerns addressed. In Part 2, there were 2046 patientparticipants in the pre-feedback cohort, 4251 in the feedback cohort, and 1421 in the post-feedback cohort. Unsatisfactory experience in at least one PQA factor was described by 45.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 43.1-47.4%] during the pre-feedback period, and 35.0% (95% CI 32.6-37.6%) during the post-feedback period. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated a patient-derived questionnaire to measure the patient's perception of anaesthesia quality. PONV, postoperative pain management, and communication with the anaesthetist are the most important features of the patient's experience. Feedback of PQA performance scores to anaesthetists can lead to improved patient experience.
Authors: Stephanie Weibel; Gerta Rücker; Leopold Hj Eberhart; Nathan L Pace; Hannah M Hartl; Olivia L Jordan; Debora Mayer; Manuel Riemer; Maximilian S Schaefer; Diana Raj; Insa Backhaus; Antonia Helf; Tobias Schlesinger; Peter Kienbaum; Peter Kranke Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2020-10-19
Authors: Johanne M Holst; Maibritt P Klitholm; Jeppe Henriksen; Mikael F Vallentin; Marie K Jessen; Maria Bolther; Mathias J Holmberg; Maria Høybye; Peter Carøe Lind; Asger Granfeldt; Lars W Andersen Journal: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand Date: 2022-08-22 Impact factor: 2.274