Australian private healthcare staff perspectives on patient reported experience measures (PREMs): a qualitative interview study.

IF 2.4 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Krista Verlis, Kirsten McCaffery, Tessa Copp, Rachael Dodd, Brooke Nickel, Rebekah Laidsaar-Powell
{"title":"Australian private healthcare staff perspectives on patient reported experience measures (PREMs): a qualitative interview study.","authors":"Krista Verlis, Kirsten McCaffery, Tessa Copp, Rachael Dodd, Brooke Nickel, Rebekah Laidsaar-Powell","doi":"10.1186/s41687-024-00809-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Patient reported experience measures (PREMs) are common tools utilised in hospitals to support quality improvements, allow consumers to provide feedback on care experiences and can be used to support consumers' hospital selections. This study aimed to understand the views and opinions of private hospital staff on PREM use and the utility of PREMs as a consumer decision-making tool.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Qualitative, semi-structured interview study conducted via telephone between March-June 2023. Participants (n = 10) were recruited from major private healthcare providers in Australia with half representing hospital-based staff and the other half corporate head office staff who work in patient experience and quality. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PREM benefits included an understanding of patient experience that improved provision of patient centred care with feedback acting as catalyst for change, to corporate-level strategic initiatives that address specific issues. Drawbacks of PREM reporting included concerns around skewed results by biased respondents, and completion based on hard to alter items (e.g., infrastructure) or on matters outside of hospital control (e.g., insurance). Staff had mixed reactions to consumers using PREMs results when selecting a hospital, some advocated for transparency while others feared consumers would misinterpret the data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Improved real-time reporting of PREMs, learning from other industries about recording customer experience, and mandatory reporting by private hospitals could further the benefits of PREM measurement in private healthcare. Recognised was the need for PREMs to be displayed in a readily understood way so those with limited health literacy can correctly interpret.</p>","PeriodicalId":36660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11541965/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-024-00809-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Patient reported experience measures (PREMs) are common tools utilised in hospitals to support quality improvements, allow consumers to provide feedback on care experiences and can be used to support consumers' hospital selections. This study aimed to understand the views and opinions of private hospital staff on PREM use and the utility of PREMs as a consumer decision-making tool.

Method: Qualitative, semi-structured interview study conducted via telephone between March-June 2023. Participants (n = 10) were recruited from major private healthcare providers in Australia with half representing hospital-based staff and the other half corporate head office staff who work in patient experience and quality. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically.

Results: PREM benefits included an understanding of patient experience that improved provision of patient centred care with feedback acting as catalyst for change, to corporate-level strategic initiatives that address specific issues. Drawbacks of PREM reporting included concerns around skewed results by biased respondents, and completion based on hard to alter items (e.g., infrastructure) or on matters outside of hospital control (e.g., insurance). Staff had mixed reactions to consumers using PREMs results when selecting a hospital, some advocated for transparency while others feared consumers would misinterpret the data.

Conclusions: Improved real-time reporting of PREMs, learning from other industries about recording customer experience, and mandatory reporting by private hospitals could further the benefits of PREM measurement in private healthcare. Recognised was the need for PREMs to be displayed in a readily understood way so those with limited health literacy can correctly interpret.

澳大利亚私立医疗机构员工对患者报告体验措施(PREMs)的看法:定性访谈研究。
目的:患者报告体验测量(PREMs)是医院常用的工具,可帮助医院提高质量,让消费者就护理体验提供反馈意见,并可用于帮助消费者选择医院。本研究旨在了解私立医院员工对 PREM 使用情况的看法和意见,以及 PREM 作为消费者决策工具的效用:方法:2023 年 3 月至 6 月期间,通过电话进行半结构化定性访谈研究。参与者(n = 10)来自澳大利亚主要的私立医疗机构,其中一半代表医院员工,另一半代表公司总部从事患者体验和质量工作的员工。对访谈进行了录音、转录和专题分析:PREM 的益处包括对患者体验的了解,从而改善以患者为中心的护理服务,同时反馈意见也是变革的催化剂,还包括解决具体问题的企业级战略举措。PREM 报告的缺点包括:受访者的偏见会导致结果偏差,完成报告的依据是难以改变的项目(如基础设施)或医院无法控制的事项(如保险)。员工对消费者在选择医院时使用 PREMs 结果的反应不一,有些人主张透明,有些人则担心消费者会曲解数据:结论:改进 PREMs 的实时报告、学习其他行业记录客户体验的经验以及私立医院的强制报告,可以进一步提高私立医疗机构 PREM 测量的效益。我们认识到,PREM 必须以易于理解的方式显示,以便医疗知识有限的人能够正确解读。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes Health Professions-Health Information Management
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
7.40%
发文量
120
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信