Literature DB >> 8671103

A comparison of methods for measuring patient satisfaction with consultations in primary care.

P Kinnersley1, N Stott, T Peters, I Harvey, P Hackett.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Attention needs to be paid to comparing and standardizing methods for measuring patient satisfaction with consultations in primary care.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale (MISS) and the Consultation Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ) in terms of acceptability, distribution of responses, reliability and gather evidence of validity. In addition, to compare the scores of patients completing the questionnaires immediately after the consultation in the general practitioners' surgeries with those completing the questionnaires later at home.
METHODS: The two questionnaires were bound as a single instrument with order determined at random. This was given to patients immediately after their consultations in eight practices in South Glamorgan.
RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-eight of 316 (63%) patients completed and returned questionnaires. The distributions of patient satisfaction scores for the two questionnaires were very similar. For the MISS: mean 76.6% (SD 11.4); for the CSQ mean 7.2% (SD 12.6). Correlations between sub-scales ranged from 0.58-0.84 for the MISS and from 0.40-0.79 for the CSQ. The correlation between the overall scales was 0.82. Levels of reliability for the scales and sub-scales were fair to good ranging from 0.78-0.96 for the MISS and from 0.73-0.94 for the CSQ.
CONCLUSIONS: The study does not identify one scale as being superior in psychometric terms, however by demonstrating consistency of responses it provides support for the scales as measures of patient satisfaction for use in primary care. The level of inter-correlation suggests that the sub-scales may not be clearly independent of each other and suggests that total scores may be preferred. Lower levels of satisfaction are expressed if patients complete questionnaires at home rather than in general practitioners' surgeries.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8671103     DOI: 10.1093/fampra/13.1.41

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fam Pract        ISSN: 0263-2136            Impact factor:   2.267


  42 in total

1.  Pragmatic model of patient satisfaction in general practice: progress towards a theory.

Authors:  R Baker
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1997-12

2.  Cochrane Lecture 1997. What evidence do we need for evidence based medicine?

Authors:  J T Hart
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  Do previsit expectations correlate with satisfaction of new patients presenting for evaluation with an orthopaedic surgical practice?

Authors:  Michiel G J S Hageman; Jan Paul Briët; Jeroen K Bossen; Robin D Blok; David C Ring; Ana-Maria Vranceanu
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-10-01       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  The effect of different sampling and recall periods in the CAHPS Clinician & Group (CG-CAHPS) survey.

Authors:  J Lee Hargraves; Carol Cosenza; Marc N Elliott; Paul D Cleary
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2019-05-27       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Impact on patients of expanded, general practice based, student teaching: observational and qualitative study.

Authors:  John Benson; Thelma Quince; Arthur Hibble; Thomas Fanshawe; Jon Emery
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-07-04

6.  Patient satisfaction with referral to hospital: relationship to expectations, involvement, and information-giving in the consultation.

Authors:  D Greenhow; A J Howitt; P Kinnersley
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 5.386

7.  Differences in Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Clinician and Group Survey Scores by Recency of the Last Visit: Implications for Comparability of Periodic and Continuous Sampling.

Authors:  Claude M Setodji; Q Burkhart; Ron D Hays; Denise D Quigley; Samuel A Skootsky; Marc N Elliott
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  The Chinese Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale-revised (C-MISS-R): development and validation.

Authors:  W W T Lam; R Fielding; Louis Chow; Miranda Chan; Gabriel M Leung; Ella Y Y Ho
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Deaflympians' Satisfaction With Athletic Training Services at the 2013 Deaflympic Summer Games.

Authors:  Matthew Paul Brancaleone; René Revis Shingles; Nailya DeLellis
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 2.860

10.  Measuring the patient experience in primary care: Comparing e-mail and waiting room survey delivery in a family health team.

Authors:  Morgan Slater; Tara Kiran
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 3.275

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.