Dataset Information

Can additional patient experience items improve the reliability of and add new domains to the CAHPS hospital survey?

ABSTRACT:

Context

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services will introduce the reporting of patient surveys in 2008. The Consumer Assessment of Health Care Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Hospital Survey contains 18 questions about hospital care. Internal consistency reliability of the discharge information scale is relatively low and some important domains of care are not represented.

Objective

To determine whether adding questions increases the reliability and validity of the survey.

Data sources and study setting

Surveys of patients at 181 hospitals participating in the California Hospitals Assessment and Reporting Taskforce (CHART), an initiative for voluntary public reporting of hospital performance in California.

Study design

CHART added nine questions to the CAHPS Hospital Survey; two to improve reliability of the discharge information domain, five to create a coordination of care domain, and two relating to interpreter services.

Data collection

Surveys were sent to randomly selected patients from each CHART hospital.

Principal findings

A total of 40,172 surveys were included. Adding the new discharge information questions improved the internal consistency reliability from 0.45 to 0.72 and the hospital-level reliability from 0.75 to 0.81. New coordination of care composites had good internal consistency reliabilities ranging from 0.58 to 0.70 and hospital-level reliabilities ranging from 0.84 to 0.87. The new coordination of care composites were more closely correlated with overall hospital ratings and willingness to recommend than six of the seven original domains.

Conclusions

The additional discharge information questions and the new coordination of care questions significantly improved the psychometric properties of the CAHPS Hospital Survey.

SUBMITTER: Rothman AA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2613993 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatient experience is recognised as a quality of care indicator and increasingly health services are working on achieving set targets and improving their performance. Interventions at the point of care targeting communication with patients, patient engagement in care processes and discharge planning are associated with better patient experience. However, their efficacy and application to different contexts are still unclear. The aims were to describe the interventions implemented by health services to improve patient experience, their impact on overall patient experiences and specific experiences in areas of communication, discharge planning, patient education on treatment/tests, the physical environment and access to care.MethodsSecondary data analysis of the Victorian Healthcare Experience inpatient surveys reported in September 2016 and 2018 and content analysis of interventions published in the Victorian Quality Account for 2017 from 59 public health services in Victoria, Australia. The interventions were categorised using an adapted taxonomy of professional interventions by the Cochrane EPOC Review Group. Univariate tests and confirmatory factor analysis were conducted to test measure invariance across the 2016 and 2018 groups and examine the association between each of the intervention categories on overall patient experience measure and specific outcome measures.ResultsThis study found that the overall patient experience was consistent (93%) between 2016 and 2018 samples. In comparing impact, a single intervention rather than none or multiple interventions in communication, respect and dignity and treatment and disease education areas were associated with a higher level of the overall patient experience. Interventions in waiting time, access to service, care continuity and emotional support categories were associated with a decrease in overall patient experience.ConclusionThis study found that to improve the overall patient experience, more focus is needed on evidence-based interventions in dignity and respect and emotional support. Furthermore, the choice of interventions should be guided by evidence of their efficacy and prioritising implementing one intervention well, provides more gains.