The Administration of an Expectation Survey at a Pain Medicine Clinic to Improve Patient Satisfaction: A Prospective Study.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Emmanuella Borukh, Phuong Nguyen, Geum Yeon Sim, Jasal Patel, Andrew Bloomfield, Sarang S Koushik, Jagun Raghavan, Omar Viswanath, Kevin Zacharoff, Kateryna Slinchenkova, Karina Gritsenko, Naum Shaparin
{"title":"The Administration of an Expectation Survey at a Pain Medicine Clinic to Improve Patient Satisfaction: A Prospective Study.","authors":"Emmanuella Borukh, Phuong Nguyen, Geum Yeon Sim, Jasal Patel, Andrew Bloomfield, Sarang S Koushik, Jagun Raghavan, Omar Viswanath, Kevin Zacharoff, Kateryna Slinchenkova, Karina Gritsenko, Naum Shaparin","doi":"10.1007/s11916-025-01406-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Patients' expectations are important aspects to consider for improving patients' satisfaction and willingness to return for continued care. While expectation surveys are not novel in Pain Medicine, none specifically aim to improve satisfaction. This study evaluates whether administering an expectation survey during an initial pain clinic visit improves satisfaction with treatment plans and outcomes. We hypothesized that completing the survey could increase awareness and help align expectations and satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>This study was conducted at an outpatient multidisciplinary pain clinic at an urban academic hospital and 100 first-time, English speaking adult patients were recruited. Fifty patients completed a pre-visit questionnaire on pain and expectations (intervention group), while 50 did not (control group). A follow-up survey was completed six months later by 85% of participants to assess satisfaction level with pain treatment, meeting of goals and expectations, and overall clinic experience. No significant differences were found between intervention and control groups for pain treatment satisfaction (3.46 ± 1.31 vs. 3.50 ± 1.28, p = 0.48), goal achievement (3.76 ± 1.14 vs. 3.49 ± 1.20, p = 0.30), or overall experience (3.83 ± 1.20 vs. 3.72 ± 1.14, p = 0.67). Dissatisfaction stemmed from inadequate pain relief, lack of follow-up, and unmet expectations. The lack of statistical significance suggests that merely assessing expectations without patient education or provider engagement may be insufficient. Future studies could explore how patient education, communication, and treatment understanding can impact satisfaction to potentially improve pain management experiences.</p>","PeriodicalId":50602,"journal":{"name":"Current Pain and Headache Reports","volume":"29 1","pages":"104"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12310763/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Pain and Headache Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11916-025-01406-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: Patients' expectations are important aspects to consider for improving patients' satisfaction and willingness to return for continued care. While expectation surveys are not novel in Pain Medicine, none specifically aim to improve satisfaction. This study evaluates whether administering an expectation survey during an initial pain clinic visit improves satisfaction with treatment plans and outcomes. We hypothesized that completing the survey could increase awareness and help align expectations and satisfaction.

Recent findings: This study was conducted at an outpatient multidisciplinary pain clinic at an urban academic hospital and 100 first-time, English speaking adult patients were recruited. Fifty patients completed a pre-visit questionnaire on pain and expectations (intervention group), while 50 did not (control group). A follow-up survey was completed six months later by 85% of participants to assess satisfaction level with pain treatment, meeting of goals and expectations, and overall clinic experience. No significant differences were found between intervention and control groups for pain treatment satisfaction (3.46 ± 1.31 vs. 3.50 ± 1.28, p = 0.48), goal achievement (3.76 ± 1.14 vs. 3.49 ± 1.20, p = 0.30), or overall experience (3.83 ± 1.20 vs. 3.72 ± 1.14, p = 0.67). Dissatisfaction stemmed from inadequate pain relief, lack of follow-up, and unmet expectations. The lack of statistical significance suggests that merely assessing expectations without patient education or provider engagement may be insufficient. Future studies could explore how patient education, communication, and treatment understanding can impact satisfaction to potentially improve pain management experiences.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

在疼痛医学诊所实施期望调查以提高病人满意度:一项前瞻性研究。
回顾目的:患者的期望是提高患者满意度和返回继续治疗意愿的重要考虑因素。虽然期望调查在疼痛医学中并不新颖,但没有一个专门针对提高满意度。本研究评估在最初的疼痛门诊访问期间进行期望调查是否能提高对治疗计划和结果的满意度。我们假设,完成调查可以提高意识,并帮助调整期望和满意度。最新发现:这项研究是在一家城市学术医院的门诊多学科疼痛诊所进行的,招募了100名首次说英语的成年患者。50例患者(干预组)完成了访前疼痛和期望问卷,50例患者(对照组)未完成问卷。6个月后,85%的参与者完成了一项随访调查,以评估疼痛治疗的满意度、目标和期望的满足程度以及总体临床体验。干预组与对照组在疼痛治疗满意度(3.46±1.31比3.50±1.28,p = 0.48)、目标实现度(3.76±1.14比3.49±1.20,p = 0.30)、总体体验(3.83±1.20比3.72±1.14,p = 0.67)方面均无显著差异。不满意源于疼痛缓解不足、缺乏随访和未达到预期。缺乏统计意义表明,在没有患者教育或提供者参与的情况下,仅仅评估预期可能是不够的。未来的研究可以探索患者教育、沟通和治疗理解如何影响满意度,从而潜在地改善疼痛管理体验。
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
Current Pain and Headache Reports
Current Pain and Headache Reports CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.70%
发文量
91
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: This journal aims to review the most important, recently published clinical findings regarding the diagnosis, treatment, and management of pain and headache. By providing clear, insightful, balanced contributions by international experts, the journal intends to serve all those involved in the care and prevention of pain and headache. We accomplish this aim by appointing international authorities to serve as Section Editors in key subject areas, such as anesthetic techniques in pain management, cluster headache, neuropathic pain, and migraine. Section Editors, in turn, select topics for which leading experts contribute comprehensive review articles that emphasize new developments and recently published papers of major importance, highlighted by annotated reference lists. An international Editorial Board reviews the annual table of contents, suggests articles of special interest to their country/region, and ensures that topics are current and include emerging research. Commentaries from well-known figures in the field are also provided.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信