G Cohen1, J Forbes, M Garraway. 1. Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical School, University of Edinburgh.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the consistency of survey estimates of patient satisfaction with interpersonal aspects of hospital experience. DESIGN: Interview and postal surveys, evidence from three independent population surveys being compared. SETTING: Scotland and Lothian. SUBJECTS: Randomly selected members of the general adult population who had received hospital care in the past 12 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Percentages of respondents dissatisfied with aspects of patient care. RESULTS: For items covering respect for privacy, treatment with dignity, sensitivity to feelings, treatment as an individual, and clear explanation of care there was good agreement among the surveys despite differences in wording. But for items to do with being encouraged and given time to ask questions and being listened to by doctors there was substantial disagreement. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence regarding levels of patient dissatisfaction from national or local surveys should be calibrated against evidence from other surveys to improve reliability. Some important aspects of patient satisfaction seem to have been reliably estimated by surveys of all Scottish NHS users commissioned by the management executive, but certain questions may have underestimated the extent of dissatisfaction, possibly as a result of choice of wording.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the consistency of survey estimates of patient satisfaction with interpersonal aspects of hospital experience. DESIGN: Interview and postal surveys, evidence from three independent population surveys being compared. SETTING: Scotland and Lothian. SUBJECTS: Randomly selected members of the general adult population who had received hospital care in the past 12 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Percentages of respondents dissatisfied with aspects of patient care. RESULTS: For items covering respect for privacy, treatment with dignity, sensitivity to feelings, treatment as an individual, and clear explanation of care there was good agreement among the surveys despite differences in wording. But for items to do with being encouraged and given time to ask questions and being listened to by doctors there was substantial disagreement. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence regarding levels of patient dissatisfaction from national or local surveys should be calibrated against evidence from other surveys to improve reliability. Some important aspects of patient satisfaction seem to have been reliably estimated by surveys of all Scottish NHS users commissioned by the management executive, but certain questions may have underestimated the extent of dissatisfaction, possibly as a result of choice of wording.
Authors: Allison Squires; Luk Bruyneel; Linda H Aiken; Koen Van den Heede; Tomasz Brzostek; Reinhard Busse; Anneli Ensio; Maria Schubert; Dimitrios Zikos; Walter Sermeus Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2012-07-17 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: R P McKillip; B A Borden; P Galecki; S A Ham; L Patrick-Miller; J P Hall; S Hussain; K Danahey; M Siegler; M J Sorrentino; Y Sacro; A M Davis; D T Rubin; K Lipstreuer; T S Polonsky; R Nanda; W R Harper; J L Koyner; D L Burnet; W M Stadler; M J Ratain; D O Meltzer; P H O'Donnell Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2017-04-04 Impact factor: 6.875