OBJECTIVE: It is not known whether patients' ratings of the quality of healthcare services they receive truly correlate with the quality of care from their providers. Understanding this association can potentiate improvement in healthcare delivery. We evaluated the association between patients' ratings of the quality of healthcare services received and uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We used 2 iterations of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) of adults in the USA. HINTS 2007 (4,007 respondents; weighted population = 75,397,128) evaluated whether respondents were up to date with CRC screening while HINTS 4 cycle 3 (1,562 respondents; weighted population = 76,628,000) evaluated whether participants had ever received CRC screening in the past. All included respondents from both surveys were at least 50 years of age, had no history of CRC, and had rated the quality of healthcare services that they had received at their healthcare provider's office in the previous 12 months. RESULTS: HINTS 2007 data showed that respondents who rated their healthcare as good or fair/poor were significantly less likely to be up to date with CRC screening compared to those who rated their healthcare as excellent. We found comparable results from analysis of HINTS 4 cycle 3 data with poorer uptake of CRC screening as the healthcare quality ratings of respondents reduced. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that patients who reported receiving lower quality of healthcare services were less likely to have undergone and be compliant with CRC screening recommendations. It is important to pay close attention to patient feedback surveys in order to improve healthcare delivery.
OBJECTIVE: It is not known whether patients' ratings of the quality of healthcare services they receive truly correlate with the quality of care from their providers. Understanding this association can potentiate improvement in healthcare delivery. We evaluated the association between patients' ratings of the quality of healthcare services received and uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We used 2 iterations of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) of adults in the USA. HINTS 2007 (4,007 respondents; weighted population = 75,397,128) evaluated whether respondents were up to date with CRC screening while HINTS 4 cycle 3 (1,562 respondents; weighted population = 76,628,000) evaluated whether participants had ever received CRC screening in the past. All included respondents from both surveys were at least 50 years of age, had no history of CRC, and had rated the quality of healthcare services that they had received at their healthcare provider's office in the previous 12 months. RESULTS: HINTS 2007 data showed that respondents who rated their healthcare as good or fair/poor were significantly less likely to be up to date with CRC screening compared to those who rated their healthcare as excellent. We found comparable results from analysis of HINTS 4 cycle 3 data with poorer uptake of CRC screening as the healthcare quality ratings of respondents reduced. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that patients who reported receiving lower quality of healthcare services were less likely to have undergone and be compliant with CRC screening recommendations. It is important to pay close attention to patient feedback surveys in order to improve healthcare delivery.
Authors: David A Lieberman; Douglas K Rex; Sidney J Winawer; Francis M Giardiello; David A Johnson; Theodore R Levin Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2012-07-03 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Douglas K Rex; C Richard Boland; Jason A Dominitz; Francis M Giardiello; David A Johnson; Tonya Kaltenbach; Theodore R Levin; David Lieberman; Douglas J Robertson Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2017-06-06 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Adeyinka O Laiyemo; Akeem O Adebogun; Chyke A Doubeni; Luisel Ricks-Santi; Shelly McDonald-Pinkett; Patrick E Young; Brooks D Cash; Carrie N Klabunde Journal: Prev Med Date: 2014-06-23 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Reinier G S Meester; Chyke A Doubeni; Ann G Zauber; S Luuk Goede; Theodore R Levin; Douglas A Corley; Ahmedin Jemal; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-03-12 Impact factor: 6.860