BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction has been associated with improved outcomes and become a focus of reimbursement. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate an intervention to improve patient satisfaction. DESIGN: Nonrandomized, pre-post study that took place from 2011 to 2012. SETTING: Large tertiary academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Internal medicine (IM) resident physicians, non-IM resident physicians, and adult patients of the resident physicians. INTERVENTION: IM resident physicians were provided with patient satisfaction education through a conference, real-time individualized patient satisfaction score feedback, monthly recognition, and incentives for high patient-satisfaction scores. MAIN MEASURES: Patient satisfaction on physician-related and overall satisfaction questions on the HCAHPS survey. We conducted a difference-in-differences regression analysis comparing IM and non-IM patient responses, adjusting for differences in patient characteristics. KEY RESULTS: In our regression analysis, the percentage of patients who responded positively to all 3 physician-related Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) questions increased by 8.1% in the IM and 1.5% in the control cohorts (absolute difference 6.6%, P = 0.04). The percentage of patients who would definitely recommend this hospital to friends and family increased by 7.1% in the IM and 1.5% in the control cohorts (absolute difference 5.6%, P = 0.02). The national average for the HCAHPS outcomes studied improved by no more than 3.1%. LIMITATIONS: This study was nonrandomized and was conducted at a single site. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first intervention associated with a significant improvement in HCAHPS scores. This may serve as a model to increase patient satisfaction, hospital revenue, and train resident physicians.
BACKGROUND:Patient satisfaction has been associated with improved outcomes and become a focus of reimbursement. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate an intervention to improve patient satisfaction. DESIGN: Nonrandomized, pre-post study that took place from 2011 to 2012. SETTING: Large tertiary academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Internal medicine (IM) resident physicians, non-IM resident physicians, and adult patients of the resident physicians. INTERVENTION: IM resident physicians were provided with patient satisfaction education through a conference, real-time individualized patient satisfaction score feedback, monthly recognition, and incentives for high patient-satisfaction scores. MAIN MEASURES: Patient satisfaction on physician-related and overall satisfaction questions on the HCAHPS survey. We conducted a difference-in-differences regression analysis comparing IM and non-IM patient responses, adjusting for differences in patient characteristics. KEY RESULTS: In our regression analysis, the percentage of patients who responded positively to all 3 physician-related Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) questions increased by 8.1% in the IM and 1.5% in the control cohorts (absolute difference 6.6%, P = 0.04). The percentage of patients who would definitely recommend this hospital to friends and family increased by 7.1% in the IM and 1.5% in the control cohorts (absolute difference 5.6%, P = 0.02). The national average for the HCAHPS outcomes studied improved by no more than 3.1%. LIMITATIONS: This study was nonrandomized and was conducted at a single site. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first intervention associated with a significant improvement in HCAHPS scores. This may serve as a model to increase patient satisfaction, hospital revenue, and train resident physicians.
Authors: Karina W Davidson; Jonathan Shaffer; Siqin Ye; Louise Falzon; Iheanacho O Emeruwa; Kevin Sundquist; Ifeoma A Inneh; Susan L Mascitelli; Wilhelmina M Manzano; David K Vawdrey; Henry H Ting Journal: BMJ Qual Saf Date: 2016-08-03 Impact factor: 7.035
Authors: Sara L Toomey; Marc N Elliott; Alan M Zaslavsky; David J Klein; Sifon Ndon; Shannon Hardy; Melody Wu; Mark A Schuster Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2017-03-22 Impact factor: 7.124