Literature DB >> 7731280

A comparative study of seven measures of patient satisfaction.

C K Ross1, C A Steward, J M Sinacore.   

Abstract

The acceptability of satisfaction as a quality indicator is qualified by several well known measurement problems. This study examines the variability in satisfaction evaluations related to different measurement methods and the effect of response biases on reported satisfaction. Satisfaction evaluations using seven different, commonly used measures of patient satisfaction were obtained from the same sample of respondents. The seven measures were: 1) a global measure of satisfaction using a visual analogue scale; 2) a multidimensional measure of satisfaction based on the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire using an evaluation response format (poor, fair, good, very good, excellent); 3) a two-item overall evaluation of quality using the evaluation response format; 4) a six-item attitude measure of general satisfaction using a five-point Likert agree-disagree response format; 5) a four-item attitude measure of satisfaction with physician, using the agree-disagree response format; 6) a four-item measure of behavioral intention; and 7) willingness-to-pay in dollars. The percentage of favorable evaluations of care ranged from 63% to 82% across six of the seven measures. Willingness-to-pay does not appear to be a valid measure of satisfaction. Correlations were highest between measures with similar response formats. Although an oppositional response bias was not found, a very substantial acquiescent response bias was detected. Acquiescence reduced the internal consistency of three multiple-item measures, the general and physician attitude and behavioral intention measures, to levels unacceptable even for group comparisons. Between highly and nonacquiescent respondents, levels of satisfaction were somewhat lower for the multidimensional measure of satisfaction and significantly lower for the two attitude satisfaction measures. Highly acquiescent respondents were older, less well educated, and in poorer health than nonacquiescent subjects. Results of satisfaction evaluations dependent on the measurement method used, and unreliability of measurement may be a significant problem in satisfaction measurement, especially for the oldest and most ill patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7731280     DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199504000-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  34 in total

1.  Measuring satisfaction among low-income women: a prenatal care questionnaire.

Authors:  K Raube; A Handler; D Rosenberg
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  1998-03

2.  Defining monetary values for quality of life improvements: an exploratory study.

Authors:  Jean Lachaine; Claudine Laurier; André-Pierre Contandriopoulos
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Perceived quality of care and lifestyle counseling among patients with heart disease.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Jackson; Sangeetha Krishnan; Nancy Meccone; Ira S Ockene; Melvyn Rubenfire
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.882

Review 4.  Measuring patient satisfaction for the Quality and Outcomes Framework.

Authors:  Matthew Hankins; Alice Fraser; Andrew Hodson; Claire Hooley; Helen Smith
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Predicting patient satisfaction: a study of two emergency departments.

Authors:  P R Yarnold; E A Michelson; D A Thompson; S L Adams
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  1998-12

6.  Five priority areas for research on long-term care.

Authors:  R H Binstock; W D Spector
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  [Patient- and hospital-related determinants of satisfaction with hospital stay of severely injured patients].

Authors:  O Ommen; C Janssen; E Neugebauer; K Rehm; B Boullion; B Bouillon; H Pfaff
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 8.  Patient assessment of treatment satisfaction: methods and practical issues.

Authors:  D A Revicki
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 23.059

9.  Scoring and psychometric properties of the Eye-Drop Satisfaction Questionnaire (EDSQ), an instrument to assess satisfaction and compliance with glaucoma treatment.

Authors:  Antoine Regnault; Muriel Viala-Danten; Hélène Gilet; Gilles Berdeaux
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-02-01       Impact factor: 2.209

10.  Quality of care from the perspective of the cataract patient: the reliability and validity of the QUOTE-cataract.

Authors:  M D Nijkamp; H J M Sixma; H Afman; F Hiddema; S A Koopmans; B van den Borne; F Hendrikse; R M M A Nuijts
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 4.638

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.