Relationship of Press Ganey Satisfaction and PROMIS Function and Pain in Foot and Ankle Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (10) ◽  
pp. 1206-1211
Author(s):  
Devon C. Nixon ◽  
Chong Zhang ◽  
Maxwell W. Weinberg ◽  
Angela P. Presson ◽  
Florian Nickisch
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Patient Experience ◽  
Care Provider ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Satisfaction With Care ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: Patient satisfaction has garnered interest as a tool to measure health care quality. However, orthopedic studies in total joint arthroplasty, spine, and hand patients have offered conflicting relationships between Press Ganey (PG) satisfaction metrics and patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. No prior study has assessed the relationship between PG and PROs in foot and ankle patients. Whether satisfaction and outcomes instruments, though, measure similar or differing aspects of the patient experience is unclear. Here, we tested if there was an association between Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) outcomes and PG satisfaction scores. Methods: PG and PROMIS outcomes data for new patient visits to an orthopedic foot and ankle clinic between 2015 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients that completed PG satisfaction surveys were included for study. All patients who completed PG surveys and completed one or both PROMIS physical function (PF) or pain interference (PI) metrics administered by computerized adaptive testing were included. Negative binomial regressions were used to compare PRO scores to PG overall satisfaction and PG satisfaction with care provider, adjusting for patient characteristics. Results were reported as dissatisfaction score ratios, which represented the amount of PG dissatisfaction associated with a 10-point increase in PROMIS PF or PI. Of the 3984 new patient visits, only 441 completed the PG survey (11.3% response rate). Results: Ceiling effects were seen with PG data: 64% of patients reported perfect satisfaction with care provider and 27% had perfect overall satisfaction. Higher function on the PROMIS PF was weakly associated with increased overall satisfaction (ratio = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68-0.99, P = .039) and increased satisfaction with care provider (ratio = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.40-0.92, P = .019). However, pain (PROMIS PI) was not associated with overall satisfaction or with satisfaction with care provider. Conclusions: Based on our data here, patient satisfaction was weakly related to patient-reported function but not pain interference among this subset of new patients presenting to a foot and ankle clinic. Given our essentially negative findings, further study is needed to determine which aspects of the PG satisfaction and PROMIS scores track similarly. Further, our findings add to the growing literature showcasing limitations of the PG tool, including low response rates and notable ceiling effects. If satisfaction metrics and patient-reported outcomes capture differing aspects of the patient experience, we need to better understand how that influences the measurement of health care quality and value. Level of Evidence: Level III, comparative study.

Self-reported patient experience and quality of care among elderly patients with colon cancer.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 33-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca A Snyder ◽  
Rebecca Wardrop ◽  
Alexander Mclain ◽  
Alexander A. Parikh ◽  
Anna Cass
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Experience ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Stage I ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Experience Of Care ◽  
Patient Reported

33 Background: Although studies have identified demographic and clinical factors associated with quality colorectal cancer care, the association between patient-reported experience of care and quality of care is unknown. Our primary aim was to assess the relationship between patient-reported experience of care and receipt of guideline-concordant colon cancer (CC) treatment. Methods: Fee-For-Service Medicare beneficiaries with resected stage I-III CC (2003-2013) were identified in the linked SEER registry and Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems patient experience survey (SEER-CAHPS) dataset. Patient-reported ratings were compared based on receipt of care consistent with recommended treatment guidelines [resection of ≥ 12 lymph nodes (LN) (stage I-III) and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy (stage III)]. Linear regression was performed to compare mean patient experience scores by receipt of guideline concordant care, adjusting for patient and hospital factors. Results: 1010 patients with stage I-III CC were identified (mean age 76.7, SE 6.9). Of these, 58.4% of stage I (n = 192/329) and 73.4% of stage II (n = 298/406) patients underwent resection of ≥ 12 LN. Among stage III patients, 76.0% (n = 209/275) underwent resection of ≥ 12 LN and 52.4% (n = 144/275) received adjuvant chemotherapy. By multivariable analysis, patient-reported ratings of health care quality, personal and specialty physicians, customer service, physician communication, getting needed care, and getting care quickly were similar among patients who received guideline-concordant treatment compared to those who did not. However, mean ratings of overall health care quality [91.3 (SE 2.0) vs. 82.4 (SE 1.7), p = 0.0004] and getting needed care [92.8 (SE 2.4) vs. 86.8 (SE 2.0), p = 0.047] were higher among stage III patients who received guideline concordant care compared to those who did not. Conclusions: Patient-reported ratings of health care quality and ability to get needed care are associated with guideline concordant cancer care among elderly patients with stage III CC. Further investigation is needed to determine if patient-reported experience correlates with other clinical measures of quality of colorectal cancer care.

Patient Reported Outcomes as Indicators of Pediatric Health Care Quality

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. S90-S96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine B. Bevans ◽  
JeanHee Moon ◽  
Adam C. Carle ◽  
Constance A. Mara ◽  
Jin-Shei Lai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Pediatric Health ◽  
Pediatric Health Care ◽  
Patient Reported

scholarly journals Relationship Of Press Ganey® Satisfaction and Promis Function and Pain in Foot and Ankle Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 2473011420S0006
Author(s):  
Devon C. Nixon ◽  
Chong Zhang ◽  
Maxwell Weinberg ◽  
Angela Presson ◽  
Florian Nickisch
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Care Provider ◽  
Computerized Adaptive Testing ◽  
Negative Binomial ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Satisfaction With Care ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Ceiling Effects ◽  
The Relationship

Category: Other Introduction/Purpose: Patient satisfaction has garnered interest as a tool to measure healthcare quality. The Press Ganey (PG) instrument was designed to assess outpatient patient satisfaction by probing multiple domains of the patient experience including clinic wait-times and overall assessment of the provider practice. However, orthopaedic studies in total joint arthroplasty, spine, and hand patients have offered conflicting relationships between PG satisfaction metrics and patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. No prior study has assessed the relationship between PG and PROs in foot and ankle patients. Here, we tested if there was an association between PROMIS outcomes and PG satisfaction scores. Methods: Between 2015 and 2017, new patient visits to orthopedic foot and ankle clinics at a single academic center were retrospectively analyzed. Patients that completed PG satisfaction surveys were included for study. All patients who completed PG surveys had completed either one or both of the PROMIS physical function (PF) or pain interference (PI) metrics administered by computerized adaptive testing. Negative binomial regressions were used to compare PRO scores to PG overall satisfaction and PG satisfaction with care provider, adjusting for patient characteristics. Results were reported as dissatisfaction score ratios along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and P-values. Results: Out of 3,984 new patient visits, only 441 completed the PG survey (11.3% response rate). Ceiling effects were seen with PG data as 64% of our patients reported perfect satisfaction with care provider and 27% had perfect overall satisfaction. Higher function on the PROMIS PF was weakly associated with increased overall satisfaction (Ratio=0.82, 95% CI: 0.68-0.99, P=0.039) and increased satisfaction with care provider (Ratio=0.60, 95% CI: 0.40-0.92, P=0.019). However, pain (PROMIS PI) was not associated with overall satisfaction or with satisfaction with care provider. Conclusion: Patient satisfaction was weakly related to patient-reported function but not pain among new foot and ankle clinic patients. It appears from our data that PG and PROMIS measure differing components of patient care. Further, our findings showcase the limitations of the PG tool including low response rates and notable ceiling effects. Until we achieve a broader understanding of the relationship between patient satisfaction and clinical and surgical outcomes, we would caution against the use of PG data in the assessment of quality of care and reimbursement for orthopaedic foot and ankle surgery. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Patient-Reported Outcomes in Foot and Ankle Orthopedics

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 247301141985293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Lakey ◽  
Kenneth J. Hunt
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Future Outcomes ◽  
Near Future ◽  
Patient Burden

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a measure of health care quality that reflect the patient’s perceptions of their own health status. Recently, there has been a renewed interest in implementation of PROs into everyday clinical practice. There are many dozens of PROs available to foot and ankle surgeons with little consensus on which measures are most appropriate for a given condition. These measures vary widely in length, validity, and content. When integrating PROs into clinical practice, we recommend that clinicians should collect, at a minimum, validated PRO scores that assess pain, function, and general health. Furthermore, concise instruments should be used wherever possible to minimize patient burden, maximize patient engagement, and ensure meaningful data are collected. In the near future, outcomes registries employing computer adaptive testing will facilitate the routine collection of PRO data from all patients. Level of Evidence: Level V, expert opinion.

scholarly journals Funnel plots of patient‐reported outcomes to evaluate health‐care quality: Basic principles, pitfalls and considerations

Nephrology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esmee M. Willik ◽  
Erik W. Zwet ◽  
Tiny Hoekstra ◽  
Frans J. Ittersum ◽  
Marc H. Hemmelder ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Funnel Plots

scholarly journals In patient satisfaction survey- how does it help our health care delivery system (the patient, the health care giver and the organization)?

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (10) ◽  
pp. 3280
Author(s):  
Priti Prasad Shah
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Health Care Delivery ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Healthcare Services ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Satisfaction Survey ◽  
Patient Satisfaction Survey

Background: Patient satisfaction is a mean of measuring the effectiveness of health care delivery.    It can suggest proportion to the problem areas and a reference point to take management decisions. It can serve as a mean of holding physician accountable. Patient satisfaction data can be used to document health care quality for accrediting organizations and consumer groups. They can also measure specific initiative or changes in service delivery.  They can increase loyalty of patients by demonstrating you care their perceptions and looking for ways to improve. The purpose of our study is to carry out evaluation of hospital services by getting a patient satisfaction survey. Main aim is to identify potential problems in the services.Methods: A hospital based inpatient satisfaction survey study done on 200 patients. A Predesigned structured questionnaire was based on relevance of questions to healthcare services on various aspects of inpatient care.  The interviewer based questionnaires were filled after obtaining verbal informed consent from all subjects. 200 valid responses were analyzed using MS office excel. Data analysis of study is done using the SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Science) Version 17 for window.Results: Results of our study is very positive and suggest that patients were satisfied with the attitude of doctors, nurses and paramedical staff and it was appreciated. As in D Y Patil Medical College and Hospital most facilities are free for the patients, so we got better feedback for the facilities and satisfaction for this study. Satisfied patients are more likely to continue using the health care services and maintain their relationship with specific health care providers.Conclusions: Patient satisfaction survey can be a driving force for changes in health care delivery with institutions and individuals. These initiatives can promote improvement in practice and also respond to patient expressed needs.

Development and validation of a generic patient experience instrument for measuring specialist outpatient service in Hong Kong

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (10) ◽  
pp. G158-G164
Author(s):  
Eliza Lai-Yi Wong ◽  
Annie Wai-Ling Cheung ◽  
Richard Huan Xu ◽  
Carrie Ho-Kwan Yam ◽  
Sui-Fai Lui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Hong Kong ◽  
Patient Experience ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Care Service ◽  
Health Care Service ◽  
Outpatient Service ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Outpatient Clinics ◽  
Patients Experience

Abstract Objective The measurement of patients’ experience is an important performance indicator of health care service quality. A reliable and validated instrument to elicit patients’ experience is an important step. This study aimed to develop a generic instrument to elicit patients’ experience in specialist outpatient clinic provision with a rigorous and systematic methodology. Design The instrument framework was developed according to findings of a literature review, patient focus group discussions, individual patient in-depth interviews and expert discussion. The framework was tested for psychometric performance with a cross-sectional telephone survey in terms of practicality, validity, reliability and responsiveness. Setting 26 Public specialist outpatient clinics in Hong Kong were selected. Participants Cantonese speaking patients aged 18 or above. Intervention(s): None. Main outcome measure(s): A validated generic patient experience questionnaire measuring Specialist Outpatient Service (SOPEQ). Results A proportional sample total of 513 patients from 26 specialist outpatient clinics were recruited, response rate of 56%. The findings indicated that the instrument is practicable and concise. A structure of nine dimensions with 47 items structure was confirmed based on exploratory factor analysis and content validity. These items showed satisfactory internal reliability consistency (α = 0.793) and test–retest reliability ranged from 0.618 to 0.829. Conclusions The SOPEQ was established with satisfactory psychometric properties. A valid and reliable measure to evaluate patients’ experience is an important step in providing valuable input from patients’ perspective for policy makers to improve patient-centred services. It also serves as a platform to engage patients and thereby, in improving health care quality and enhancing health outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document