Dataset Information

Routine patient surveys: Patients' preferences and information gained by healthcare providers.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patient feedback after contact with a hospital is regarded as an important source of information for the improvement of local healthcare services. Routine patient surveys are in widespread use to obtain such feedback. While general principles for the composition of this kind of surveys have been described in the literature, it is unknown which method of contact and topics of feedback are important to patients in postcontact healthcare surveys.

Material and methods

We invited 2931 consecutive patients who had in- or outpatient contact with the Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology at the University Hospital Basel to an anonymous survey. They were asked whether they were generally in favor of feedback surveys. They also had the opportunity to state their preferred form of contact (text message, app, email, online or letter) and provide up to three topics that they regarded as specifically important in patient surveys.

Results

A total of 745 patients participated in the survey (25.4%), of these 61.9% expressed the preference to be surveyed, and 69.1% selected `letter' as one of the preferred forms of contact. Favoring only `letter' contact increased substantially with age. Overall 54.6% of patients stated at least one topic that they wished to give feedback on. The most frequent topics were related to treatment and rather general aspects regarding staff and overall impression. The wish to include suggestions for improvements was rarely mentioned as specific topic.

Conclusions

The majority of patients seem to be rather indifferent to the existence and content of patient surveys. They mention a wide range of topics from general to specific ones, but do not express interest in the opportunity to suggest changes. There is a need to effectively engage patients in healthcare planning using new approaches to obtain valuable feedback on patients' hospital stay and contact experiences. These new approaches should ideally be more informative and cost-effective than the current practice.

SUBMITTER: Schopf AC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6675389 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Routine patient surveys: Patients' preferences and information gained by healthcare providers.

Schöpf Andrea C AC Vach Werner W Jakob Marcel M Saxer Franziska F

PloS one 20190801 8

<h4>Background</h4>Patient feedback after contact with a hospital is regarded as an important source of information for the improvement of local healthcare services. Routine patient surveys are in widespread use to obtain such feedback. While general principles for the composition of this kind of surveys have been described in the literature, it is unknown which method of contact and topics of feedback are important to patients in postcontact healthcare surveys.<h4>Material and methods</h4>We in ...[more]

PMID: 31369612

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSevere combined immunodeficiency (SCID) is a group of life-threatening genetic disorders responsible for severe dysfunctions of the immune system. Despite the expansion of newborn screening in the U.S., there are gaps in healthcare providers' knowledge of SCID.MethodsWe recruited 277 U.S. healthcare providers for an online survey. The survey assessed providers' experience with SCID patients, knowledge about SCID, and needs and preferred formats for SCID-related informational resources. We examined differences between providers who have seen 2 or more patients with SCID (SCID provider group) and those who have seen 0-1 SCID patients (non-SCID provider group).ResultsOverall, 210 (75.8%) providers were included in the non-SCID provider group, and 121 (57.6%) of these providers were pediatricians. Compared to the SCID provider group, non-SCID provider group reported lower mean rating of SCID knowledge (x̄ = 4.8 vs. x̄ = 8.6, p < 0.0001) and higher informational needs. The largest informational needs identified by the non-SCID provider group were "understanding specific type of SCID" and "understanding what to expect across the lifespan." In the SCID provider group, the highest rated informational need was "family support referrals." Participants in the non-SCID provider group identified scientific publications and websites as preferred formats, with some variation between medical specialties.ConclusionBased on their experience with treating SCID patients, providers have varying levels of SCID knowledge and different informational needs. For providers who have encountered few SCID patients, informational needs start early, usually immediately after receiving a positive newborn screening result. These findings provide useful direction for the development and preferred outlets for receiving SCID-related information, with some variations between different types of providers. Results from this study will serve as a guide for creating relevant and accessible SCID resources for providers who can utilize them to improve care for SCID patients.

Project description:Background and objectivesThe Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal is a patient-reported outcome measure used to assess physical and psychosocial symptom burden in patients treated with maintenance dialysis. Studies of patient-reported outcome measures suggest the need for deeper understanding of how to optimize their implementation and use. This study examines patient and provider perspectives of the implementation process and the influence of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal on symptom management, patient-provider communication, and interdisciplinary communication.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsEight in-facility hemodialysis programs in Ontario, Canada, assessed patients using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal every 4-6 weeks for 1 year. Screening and completion rates were tracked, and pre- and postimplementation surveys and midimplementation interviews were conducted with patients and providers. A chart audit was conducted 12 months postimplementation.ResultsIn total, 1459 patients completed the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal; 58% of eligible patients completed the preimplementation survey (n=718), and 56% of patients who completed the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal at least once completed the postimplementation survey (n=569). Provider survey response rates were 71% (n=514) and 54% (n=319), respectively. Nine patients/caregivers from three sites and 48 providers from all sites participated in interviews. A total of 1207 charts were audited. Seven of eight sites had mean screening rates over 80%, suggesting that routine use of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal in clinical practice is feasible. However, the multiple data sources painted an inconsistent picture of the value and effect of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal standardized symptom screening processes across providers and sites; improved patient and provider symptom awareness, particularly for psychosocial symptoms; and empowered patients to raise issues with providers. Yet, there was little, if any, statistically significant improvement in the metrics used to assess symptom management, patient-provider communication, and interdisciplinary communication.ConclusionsThe Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal patient-reported outcome measure may be useful to standardize symptom screening, enhance awareness of psychosocial symptoms among patients and providers, and empower patients rather than to reduce symptom burden.

Dataset Information

Routine patient surveys: Patients' preferences and information gained by healthcare providers.

Background

Material and methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Routine patient surveys: Patients' preferences and information gained by healthcare providers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets