Investigating the Relationship between Ambulatory and Hospital Patient Experience Scores in a Neurosurgery Practice.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Meyrat R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8469641 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Studies have examined the relationship between physician empathy and patient experience, but few have explored it in surgeons. The purpose of this study was to report on orthopedic surgeon empathy in a mutlispecialty practice and explore its association with orthopedic patient experience. Patients completed the consultation and relational empathy (CARE) measure (March 2017-August 2018) and Canadian Patient Experience Survey-Inpatient Care (CPES-IC; March 2017-February 2019) to assess empathy and patient experience, respectively. Consultation and relational empathy measures were correlated to CPES-IC for 3 surgeon-related questions pertaining to respect, listening, and explaining. Surgeon CARE scores (n = 1134) ranged from 42.0 ± 9.1 to 48.6 ± 2.4 with 50.4% of patients rating their surgeon as perfectly empathic. There were no significant differences between surgeons for CPES-IC continuous and topbox scores (n = 834) for respect and correlations between CPES-IC questions. The CARE measure for both continuous and topbox scores were weak to moderate, but none were significant. Empathy was associated with surgeon respect and careful listening, despite lack of significant correlation. Possible future work could use an empathy tool more appropriate for this surgeon population.
| S-EPMC7786763 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionHospitals commonly examine patient safety culture and other quality indicators to evaluate and improve performance in relation to quality and safety. A growing body of research has separately examined relationships between patient safety culture and patient experience on clinical outcomes and other quality indicators. However, there is a knowledge gap regarding the relationship between these two important domains. This article describes the protocol for a scoping review of published literature examining the relationship between patient safety culture and patient experience in hospital settings. The scoping review will provide an overview of research into the relationship between patient safety culture and patient experience in hospital contexts, map key concepts underpinning these domains and identify research gaps for further study.Methods and analysisThe scoping review will be conducted using the five stages of Arksey and O'Malley's framework: identify the research question; identify relevant studies; study selection; chart data; and collate, summarise and report the results. The inclusion criteria will be applied using the Population, Concept and Context Framework. Searches will be conducted in the CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus and SciELO databases, without applying date range limits. Hand-searching of grey literature will also be performed to find relevant, non-indexed literature. Data will be extracted using a standardised data extraction form developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Both descriptive and thematic analyses will be undertaken to scope key concepts within the body of reviewed literature.Ethics and disseminationThis type of study does not require an ethics review. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences.
| S-EPMC8169466 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesPatient-reported experience measures are increasingly being used to routinely monitor the quality of care. With the increasing attention on such measures, hospital managers seek ways to systematically improve patient experience across hospital departments, in particular where outcomes are used for public reporting or reimbursement. However, it is currently unclear whether hospitals with more mature quality management systems or stronger focus on patient involvement and patient-centered care strategies perform better on patient-reported experience. We assessed the effect of such strategies on a range of patient-reported experience measures.Materials and methodsWe employed a cross-sectional, multi-level study design randomly recruiting hospitals from the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Turkey between May 2011 and January 2012. Each hospital contributed patient level data for four conditions/pathways: acute myocardial infarction, stroke, hip fracture and deliveries. The outcome variables in this study were a set of patient-reported experience measures including a generic 6-item measure of patient experience (NORPEQ), a 3-item measure of patient-perceived discharge preparation (Health Care Transition Measure) and two single item measures of perceived involvement in care and hospital recommendation. Predictor variables included three hospital management strategies: maturity of the hospital quality management system, patient involvement in quality management functions and patient-centered care strategies. We used directed acyclic graphs to detail and guide the modeling of the complex relationships between predictor variables and outcome variables, and fitted multivariable linear mixed models with random intercept by hospital, and adjusted for fixed effects at the country level, hospital level and patient level.ResultsOverall, 74 hospitals and 276 hospital departments contributed data on 6,536 patients to this study (acute myocardial infarction n = 1,379, hip fracture n = 1,503, deliveries n = 2,088, stroke n = 1,566). Patients admitted for hip fracture and stroke had the lowest scores across the four patient-reported experience measures throughout. Patients admitted after acute myocardial infarction reported highest scores on patient experience and hospital recommendation; women after delivery reported highest scores for patient involvement and health care transition. We found no substantial associations between hospital-wide quality management strategies, patient involvement in quality management, or patient-centered care strategies with any of the patient-reported experience measures.ConclusionThis is the largest study so far to assess the complex relationship between quality management strategies and patient experience with care. Our findings suggest absence of and wide variations in the institutionalization of strategies to engage patients in quality management, or implement strategies to improve patient-centeredness of care. Seemingly counterintuitive inverse associations could be capturing a scenario where hospitals with poorer quality management were beginning to improve their patient experience. The former suggests that patient-centered care is not yet sufficiently integrated in quality management, while the latter warrants a nuanced assessment of the motivation and impact of involving patients in the design and assessment of services.
| S-EPMC4494712 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To examine the relationship between hospital volume and in-hospital adverse events.Patient safety indicator (PSI) was used to identify hospital-acquired adverse events in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database in abdominal aortic aneurysm, coronary artery bypass graft, and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass from 2005 to 2008.In this observational study, volume thresholds were defined by mean year-specific terciles. PSI risk-adjusted rates were analyzed by volume tercile for each procedure.Overall, hospital volume was inversely related to preventable adverse events. High-volume hospitals had significantly lower risk-adjusted PSI rates compared to lower volume hospitals (p < .05).These data support the relationship between hospital volume and quality health care delivery in select surgical cases. This study highlights differences between hospital volume and risk-adjusted PSI rates for three common surgical procedures and highlights areas of focus for future studies to identify pathways to reduce hospital-acquired events.
| S-EPMC3419887 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the degree to which variations in publicly reported hospital scores arising from the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES) are subject to chance.DesignSecondary analysis of publically reported data.SettingEnglish National Health Service hospitals.Participants72 756 patients who were recently treated for cancer in one of 146 hospitals and responded to the 2016 English CPES.Main outcome measuresSpearman-Brown reliability of hospital scores on 51 evaluative questions regarding cancer care.ResultsHospitals varied in respondent sample size with a median hospital sample size of 419 responses (range 31-1972). There were some hospitals with generally highly reliable scores across most questions, whereas other hospitals had generally unreliable scores (the median reliability of question scores within individual hospitals varied between 0.11 and 0.86). Similarly, there were some questions with generally high reliability across most hospitals, whereas other questions had generally low reliability. Of the 7377 individual hospital scores publically reported (146 hospitals by 51 questions, minus 69 suppressed scores), only 34% reached a reliability of 0.7, the minimum generally considered to be useful. In order for 80% of the individual hospital scores to reach a reliability of 0.7, some hospitals would require a fourfold increase in number of respondents; although in a few other hospitals sample sizes could be reduced.ConclusionsThe English Patient Experience Survey represents a globally unique source for understanding experience of a patient with cancer; but in its present form, it is not reliable for high stakes comparisons of the performance of different hospitals. Revised sampling strategies and survey questions could help increase the reliability of hospital scores, and thus make the survey fit for use in performance comparisons.
| S-EPMC6661614 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRoutinely collected patient experience scores may inform risk of patient outcomes. The objective of the study was to evaluate the risk of hospital admission within 30-days following third-party receipt of the patient experience survey and guide interventions.MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems surveys, January 2016-July 2019, from an institution's 20 hospitals in four U.S. states. Surveys were routinely sent to patients using census sampling. We analyzed surveys received ≤60 days following discharge from patients living ≤60 miles of any of the institution's hospitals. The exposures were 19 survey items. The outcome was hospital admission within 30 days after third-party receipt of the survey. We evaluated the association of favorable (top-box) vs unfavorable (non-top-box) score for survey items with risk of 30-day hospital admission in models including patient and hospitalization characteristics and reported adjusted odds ratios (aOR [95% confidence interval]).ResultsAmong 40,162 respondents (mean age ± standard deviation: 68.1 ± 14.0 years), 49.8% were women and 4.3% had 30-day hospital admission. Patients with 30-day hospital admission, compared to those not admitted, were more likely to be discharged from a medical service line (62.9% vs 42.3%; P < 0.001) and have a higher Elixhauser index. Favorable vs unfavorable score for hospital rating was associated with lower odds of 30-day hospital admission in the overall cohort (0.88 [0.77-0.99]; P = 0.04), medical service line (0.81 [0.70-0.94]; P = 0.007), and upper tertile of Elixhauser index (0.79 [0.67-0.92]; P = 0.003). Favorable score for recommend hospital was associated with lower odds of 30-day hospital admission in the medical service line (0.83 [0.71-0.97]; P = 0.02) but for others (e.g. cleanliness of hospital environment) showed no association.ConclusionIn routinely collected patient experience scores, favorable hospital rating was associated with lower odds of 30-day hospital admission and may inform risk stratification and interventions. Evidence-based survey items linked to patient outcomes may also inform future surveys.
| S-EPMC9928911 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patient experience is an important dimension of health care quality and is assessed using the standard Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey for inpatients. The HCAHPS scores may vary based on survey response rate and hospital size. The objective of this study was to describe the association between survey response rate and HCAHPS scores and examine whether the relationship varies based on hospital size. Medicare's Hospital Compare publicly reported HCAHPS data were used. Pearson correlation, controlling for number of staffed beds, and linear regression models were used for the analysis. Hospitals were grouped into quartiles based on number of staffed beds to delineate the effect of increasing hospital size on the relationship between survey response rate and HCAHPS scores. A significant association between HCAHPS survey response rate and all examined HCAHPS domain scores was observed. The effect size across HCAHPS domains varied based on hospital size. The relationship between HCAHPS score and survey response rate differed significantly between hospitals in the smallest and largest size quartiles for discharge information, nurse communication, and hospital quietness. While a causal relationship cannot be inferred from this study, the response rate could be a direct and/or indirect driver of HCAHPS scores. Future research should be aimed to further explore the basis of this relationship and to determine how it may inform the interpretation of HCAHPS results.
| S-EPMC7786668 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroudWith the reform of medical system in China, Beijing municipal hospitals explored a new pharmaceutical care model and set up medication therapy management services (MTMs) in ambulatory care since 2019. We were one of the first hospitals to set up this service in China. At the present, there were relatively few reports about the effect of MTMs in China. In this study, we summarized the implementation of MTMs in our hospital, explore the feasibility of pharmacist-led MTMs in ambulatory care and the impact of MTMs on patients' medical costs.MethodsA retrospective study was conducted in a university-affiliated, tertiary comprehensive hospital in Beijing, China. The patients who received at least one MTMs and with complete medical records and pharmaceutical documents from May 2019 to February 2020 were included. Pharmacists provided pharmaceutical care for patients according to the MTMs standards issued by the American Pharmacists Association, identified the numbers and classification of the patients' perceived medication-related demands, identified medication-related problems (MRPs), and developed the medication-related action plans (MAPs). All MRPs found by pharmacists, pharmaceutical interventions, and resolving recommendations were documented, and calculate the cost of treatment drugs that patients can reduce.ResultsA total of 112 patients received MTMs in ambulatory care, among them 81 cases with the completed record were included in this study. 67.9% of patients had five or more diseases, 83% of them co-took over 5 drugs. While performing MTMs, 128 patients' perceived medication-related demands were recorded in all, monitoring and judgment of adverse drug reaction (ADR) (17.19%) was the most common demand. 181 MRPs were found, with an average of 2.55 MPRs per patient. Nonadherence (38%), excessive drug treatment (20%), and adverse drug events (17.12%) were the top three MRPs. Pharmaceutical care (29.77%), adjustment of drug treatment plan (29.10%) and referral to the clinical department (23.41%) were the top three MAPs. Whereby the MTMs provided by pharmacists, the cost-saving of each patient was about $ 43.2 monthly.ConclusionBy participating in the MTMs of outpatients, the pharmacists could identify more MRPs and develop personalized MAPs timely for patients, thereby promoting rational drug use and reducing medical expenses.
| S-EPMC9945368 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlongside a recent revival in the use of psychedelics in clinical settings, there have been increases in the prevalence of recreational use, with many using psychedelics to deal with difficult emotions or to improve well-being. While clinical research is conducted in carefully controlled settings, this is not necessarily the case for recreational use. In this mixed methods online survey study, we aimed to develop an understanding of frequently used psychedelic harm reduction practices in recreational settings and how their use relates to the psychedelic experience. We also aimed to characterise users' first and most recent psychedelic trips to understand how harm reduction changes with experience.MethodsParticipants (n = 163) recounted their first and most recent psychedelic experience by providing details about the harm reduction practices they employed and completing the Challenging Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) and Emotional Breakthrough Inventory (EBI). We also asked open-ended questions for a more in-depth qualitative understanding of their views on psychedelic harm reduction.ResultsUsing ANOVA, we observe greater use of harm reduction practices for participants' most recent versus first psychedelic experience and that use of these practices is positively associated with EBI scores and negatively associated with CEQ scores (particularly for the first experience). Participants engaged in a wide range of harm reduction practices and we provide details of those which are most commonly used and those which are deemed most important by experienced users. Our qualitative analysis indicated that participants were largely positive about psychedelics and many recounted profound positive experiences. While specifics of the drug they were taking was important for aspects of harm reduction, participants largely focused on the importance of ensuring a good "set and setting" for enhancing positive effects.ConclusionsOur research helps us understand how engagement in harm reduction may increase with experience. Our mixed methods data shed light on the perceived importance of different harm reduction practices and examine their association with the psychedelic experience itself. Together, our research has important implications for the development of psychedelic harm reduction advice and provides opportunities for future research to explore the importance of these different practices in more detail.
| S-EPMC9310449 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To assess variation in patient-reported experience in inpatient neurology patients.We retrospectively identified 1045 patients 18 years and older admitted to a neurology service and discharged from January 1, 2013, through September 30, 2016, who completed Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) surveys. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the associations of patient factors with HCAHPS measures. Key driver analysis identified associations between HCAHPS measures and the Global score (combination of 0-10 hospital rating and likelihood to recommend). Multivariable logistic regression compared HCAHPS scores between neurology patients and those admitted to a neurosurgery (n=2190) or internal medicine (n=3401) service during the same period.Among patients admitted to a neurology service, overall (summary) scores did not vary significantly by diagnosis after adjustment for age, education, and overall health, but patients with neurologic diagnoses other than stroke, epilepsy, and neurodegenerative disease were more likely to report lower Pain Management scores compared with patients with cancer. Key driver analysis showed Care Transition scores as drivers of the Global score. After adjustment, general internal medicine service patients were more likely to report low Summary scores and neurosurgery service patients were significantly less likely to report low Summary scores compared with neurology service patients.Efforts to improve how neurology patients experience their care should be aimed at targeting patients' perceptions of pain management, and improving care transitions is an important first-priority target for improvement. This analysis may help other institutions improve hospital rating, value-based payments, and patient-centered outcomes.
| S-EPMC6124338 | biostudies-literature