Dataset Information

National Evaluation of Patient Preferences in Selecting Hospitals and Health Care Providers.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patient utilization of public reporting has been suboptimal despite attempts to encourage use. Lack of utilization may be due to discordance between reported metrics and what patients want to know when making health care choices.

Objective

The objective of this study was to identify measures of quality that individuals want to be presented in public reporting and explore factors associated with researching health care.

Research design

Patient interviews and focus groups were conducted to develop a survey exploring the relative importance of various health care measures.

Subjects

Interviews and focus groups conducted at local outpatient clinics. A survey administered nationally on an anonymous digital platform.

Measures

Likert scale responses were compared using tests of central tendency. Rank-order responses were compared using analysis of variance testing. Associations with binary outcomes were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression.

Results

Overall, 4672 responses were received (42.0% response rate). Census balancing yielded 2004 surveys for analysis. Measures identified as most important were hospital reputation (considered important by 61.9%), physician experience (51.5%), and primary care recommendations (43.2%). Unimportant factors included guideline adherence (17.6%) and hospital academic affiliation (13.3%, P<0.001 for all compared with most important factors). Morbidity and mortality outcome measures were not among the most important factors. Patients were unlikely to rank outcome measures as the most important factors in choosing health care providers, irrespective of age, sex, educational status, or income.

Conclusions

Patients valued hospital reputation, physician experience, and primary care recommendations while publicly reported metrics like patient outcomes were less important. Public quality reports contain information that patients perceive to be of relatively low value, which may contribute to low utilization.

SUBMITTER: Ellis RJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7492361 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies show an increased interest and usage of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in the general population and among health care workers both internationally and nationally. CAM usage is also reported to be common among surgical patients. Earlier international studies have reported that a large amount of surgical patients use it prior to and after surgery. Recent publications indicate a weak knowledge about CAM among health care workers. However the current situation in Sweden is unknown. The aim of this study was therefore to explore perceived knowledge about CAM among registered healthcare professions in surgical departments at Swedish university hospitals.MethodA questionnaire was distributed to 1757 registered physicians, nurses and physiotherapists in surgical wards at the seven university hospitals in Sweden from spring 2010 to spring 2011. The questionnaire included classification of 21 therapies into conventional, complementary, alternative and integrative, and whether patients were recommended these therapies. Questions concerning knowledge, research, and patient communication about CAM were also included.ResultA total of 737 (42.0%) questionnaires were returned. Therapies classified as complementary; were massage, manual therapies, yoga and acupuncture. Alternative therapies; were herbal medicine, dietary supplements, homeopathy and healing. Classification to integrative therapy was low, and unfamiliar therapies were Bowen therapy, iridology and Rosen method. Therapies recommended by > 40% off the participants were massage and acupuncture. Knowledge and research about CAM was valued as minor or none at all by 95.7% respectively 99.2%. Importance of possessing knowledge about it was valued as important by 80.9%. It was believed by 61.2% that more research funding should be addressed to CAM research, 72.8% were interested in reading CAM-research results, and 27.8% would consider taking part in such research. Half of the participants (55.8%) were positive to learning such therapy. Communication about CAM between patients and the health care professions was found to be rare.ConclusionThere is a lack of knowledge about CAM and research about it among registered health care professions in Swedish surgical care. However, in contrast to previous studies the results revealed that the majority perceived it as important to gain knowledge in this field.

Project description:BackgroundHealth care interactions may require patients to share with a physician information they believe but is incorrect. While a key piece of physicians' work is educating their patients, people's concerns of being seen as uninformed or incompetent by physicians may lead them to think that sharing incorrect health beliefs comes with a penalty. We tested people's perceptions of patients who share incorrect information and how these perceptions vary by the reasonableness of the belief and its centrality to the patient's disease.DesignWe recruited 399 United States Prolific.co workers (357 retained after exclusions), 200 Prolific.co workers who reported having diabetes (139 after exclusions), and 244 primary care physicians (207 after exclusions). Participants read vignettes describing patients with type 2 diabetes sharing health beliefs that were central or peripheral to the management of diabetes. Beliefs included true and incorrect statements that were reasonable or unreasonable to believe. Participants rated how a doctor would perceive the patient, the patient's ability to manage their disease, and the patient's trust in doctors.ResultsParticipants rated patients who shared more unreasonable beliefs more negatively. There was an extra penalty for incorrect statements central to the patient's diabetes management (sample 1). These results replicated for participants with type 2 diabetes (sample 2) and physician participants (sample 3).ConclusionsParticipants believed that patients who share incorrect information with their physicians will be penalized for their honesty. Physicians need to be educated on patients' concerns so they can help patients disclose what may be most important for education.HighlightsUnderstanding how people think they will be perceived in a health care setting can help us understand what they may be wary to share with their physicians.People think that patients who share incorrect beliefs will be viewed negatively.Helping patients share incorrect beliefs can improve care.

Project description:BackgroundCare continuity by a dedicated, well-trained primary care physician (PCP) has shown to improve health outcomes of patients with non-communicable diseases (NCDs). In Singapore's fee-for-service primary care system, patients can choose to consult any PCP in either a public (polyclinic), private (General Practitioners/ GP), or both types of clinics, resulting in potential fragmented care. Decision-making by patients in selecting their preferred PCP remains unclear. This study aims to explore the personal factors influencing the choice of PCP among patients with NCDs in primary care.MethodsThis qualitative research study was conducted in a typical polyclinic. In-depth interviews were conducted on patients with NCDs. Purposive sampling was implemented to enrol patients who had previously consulted PCPs in polyclinics and GP clinics, garnering their perspectives and experiences of care received from both providers. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and audited. Data was coded and analysed using thematic content analysis to identify emerging themes. The physician-specific factors which influence patients' decision-making of PCP selection are presented here.ResultsTwenty-one Asian patients aged 38 to 82 years were interviewed. They preferred PCPs with an approachable and genuine demeanour, exhibiting empathy and compassion. They valued the PCPs' verbal, non-verbal and listening skills. Regarding professional qualities, patients wanted PCPs to demonstrate competency and a patient-centred care approach. Some selected their PCP based on compatible age and gender that they felt comfortable with. Establishing good rapport with their PCP and maintaining continuity of care were deemed as major factors in patients' PCP selection.ConclusionPatients tended to select PCPs based on their personal characteristics, interpersonal skills, professional attributes, demographics, and the physician-patient relationship. PCPs should be aware of these attributes and demonstrate them during their patient interaction. Leveraging on this enables PCPs to build rapport with their patients and maintain care continuity to optimize their health outcomes.