Alana L. Conner , Beatrice V. Podtschaske , Mary Carol Mazza , Dani L. Zionts , Elizabeth J. Malcolm , Carey C. Thomson , Sara J. Singer , Arnold Milstein
{"title":"Care teams misunderstand what most upsets patients about their care","authors":"Alana L. Conner , Beatrice V. Podtschaske , Mary Carol Mazza , Dani L. Zionts , Elizabeth J. Malcolm , Carey C. Thomson , Sara J. Singer , Arnold Milstein","doi":"10.1016/j.hjdsi.2022.100657","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Negative healthcare delivery experiences can cause lasting patient distress and medical service misuse and disuse. Yet no multi-site study has examined whether care-team members understand what most upsets patients about their care.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We interviewed 373 patients and 360 care-team members in the medical oncology and ambulatory surgery clinics of 11 major healthcare organizations across six U.S. census regions. Patients deeply upset by a service-related experience (<em>n =</em> 99, 27%) answered questions about that experience, while care-team members (n = 360) answered questions about their beliefs regarding what most upsets patients. We performed content analysis to identify memorably upsetting care (MUC) themes; a generalized estimating equation to explore whether MUC theme mention frequencies varied by participant role (care-team member vs. patient), specialty (oncology vs. surgery), facility (academic vs. community), and gender; and logistic regressions to investigate the effects of participant characteristics on individual themes.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>MUC themes included three <em>systems issues</em> (<em>inefficiencies, access barriers,</em> and <em>facilities problems)</em> and four <em>care-team issues</em> (<em>miscommunication, neglect, coldness,</em> and <em>incompetence</em>). MUC theme frequencies differed by role (all Ps < 0.001), with more patients mentioning care-team coldness (OR = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.23-0.60) and incompetence (OR = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.09-0.31); but more care-team members mentioning system inefficiencies (OR = 7.01; 95% CI, 4.31–11.40) and access barriers (OR, 5.48; 95% CI, 2.81–10.69).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>When considering which service experiences most upset patients, care-team members underestimate the impact of their own behaviors and overestimate the impact of systems issues.</p></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><p>Healthcare systems should reconsider how they collect, interpret, disseminate, and respond to patient service reports.</p></div><div><h3>Level of evidence</h3><p>Level III.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":29963,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare-The Journal of Delivery Science and Innovation","volume":"10 4","pages":"Article 100657"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221307642200046X/pdfft?md5=0f7aa976f167ed7e05d0cf83f34a2434&pid=1-s2.0-S221307642200046X-main.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare-The Journal of Delivery Science and Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221307642200046X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Background
Negative healthcare delivery experiences can cause lasting patient distress and medical service misuse and disuse. Yet no multi-site study has examined whether care-team members understand what most upsets patients about their care.
Methods
We interviewed 373 patients and 360 care-team members in the medical oncology and ambulatory surgery clinics of 11 major healthcare organizations across six U.S. census regions. Patients deeply upset by a service-related experience (n = 99, 27%) answered questions about that experience, while care-team members (n = 360) answered questions about their beliefs regarding what most upsets patients. We performed content analysis to identify memorably upsetting care (MUC) themes; a generalized estimating equation to explore whether MUC theme mention frequencies varied by participant role (care-team member vs. patient), specialty (oncology vs. surgery), facility (academic vs. community), and gender; and logistic regressions to investigate the effects of participant characteristics on individual themes.
Results
MUC themes included three systems issues (inefficiencies, access barriers, and facilities problems) and four care-team issues (miscommunication, neglect, coldness, and incompetence). MUC theme frequencies differed by role (all Ps < 0.001), with more patients mentioning care-team coldness (OR = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.23-0.60) and incompetence (OR = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.09-0.31); but more care-team members mentioning system inefficiencies (OR = 7.01; 95% CI, 4.31–11.40) and access barriers (OR, 5.48; 95% CI, 2.81–10.69).
Conclusions
When considering which service experiences most upset patients, care-team members underestimate the impact of their own behaviors and overestimate the impact of systems issues.
Implications
Healthcare systems should reconsider how they collect, interpret, disseminate, and respond to patient service reports.
期刊介绍:
HealthCare: The Journal of Delivery Science and Innovation is a quarterly journal. The journal promotes cutting edge research on innovation in healthcare delivery, including improvements in systems, processes, management, and applied information technology.
The journal welcomes submissions of original research articles, case studies capturing "policy to practice" or "implementation of best practices", commentaries, and critical reviews of relevant novel programs and products. The scope of the journal includes topics directly related to delivering healthcare, such as:
● Care redesign
● Applied health IT
● Payment innovation
● Managerial innovation
● Quality improvement (QI) research
● New training and education models
● Comparative delivery innovation