[Cross-validation of simple questioning methods to determine patient satisfaction with anaesthesia care].

L H Eberhart, U Bothner, W Bündgen, I Celik, G Geldner, P Kranke, D Sauer, M Simon, K Werthwein, H Wulf
{"title":"[Cross-validation of simple questioning methods to determine patient satisfaction with anaesthesia care].","authors":"L H Eberhart,&nbsp;U Bothner,&nbsp;W Bündgen,&nbsp;I Celik,&nbsp;G Geldner,&nbsp;P Kranke,&nbsp;D Sauer,&nbsp;M Simon,&nbsp;K Werthwein,&nbsp;H Wulf","doi":"10.1055/s-2004-814550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Evaluation of patient satisfaction with the perioperative care is an integral part of modern quality management. For this purpose simple questioning techniques are often used in clinical practise or reports of clinical trials. However, little research has been performed to investigate whether these tools and methods are useful and provide valid information.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two-hundred patients undergoing elective surgical procedures were interviewed. Five different simple techniques or questions that have been used in the international and in the German literature throughout the last years were applied in random sequence together with the validated German translation of the QoR-9 questionnaire to measure quality of recovery. All analyses were performed descriptively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All investigated techniques could be answered without help by another person in 95 % up to 100 %. All simple dichotomous questions regarding satisfaction were insufficient to discriminate satisfied from less satisfied patients. A rating using grades known from the German school system (1 - 6) and a visual analogue scale (VAS; 0 - 100 mm) obtained ratings lower than the maximum possible values in 10 % and 11 % of the patients respectively. Furthermore, the flexibility that was provided by these tools was not utilized by the patients. The results of the QoR-9 questionnaire as a marker of postoperative recovery showed only a moderate correlation with ratings of patient satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Until now, there is no method or questioning technique in the German language that can be recommended for a quality assurance program. Thus, further research is needed to develop tools that provide valid information with adequate resolution to allow discrimination of patient satisfaction with perioperative care.</p>","PeriodicalId":520554,"journal":{"name":"Anasthesiologie, Intensivmedizin, Notfallmedizin, Schmerztherapie : AINS","volume":" ","pages":"406-11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1055/s-2004-814550","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anasthesiologie, Intensivmedizin, Notfallmedizin, Schmerztherapie : AINS","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-814550","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Introduction: Evaluation of patient satisfaction with the perioperative care is an integral part of modern quality management. For this purpose simple questioning techniques are often used in clinical practise or reports of clinical trials. However, little research has been performed to investigate whether these tools and methods are useful and provide valid information.

Methods: Two-hundred patients undergoing elective surgical procedures were interviewed. Five different simple techniques or questions that have been used in the international and in the German literature throughout the last years were applied in random sequence together with the validated German translation of the QoR-9 questionnaire to measure quality of recovery. All analyses were performed descriptively.

Results: All investigated techniques could be answered without help by another person in 95 % up to 100 %. All simple dichotomous questions regarding satisfaction were insufficient to discriminate satisfied from less satisfied patients. A rating using grades known from the German school system (1 - 6) and a visual analogue scale (VAS; 0 - 100 mm) obtained ratings lower than the maximum possible values in 10 % and 11 % of the patients respectively. Furthermore, the flexibility that was provided by these tools was not utilized by the patients. The results of the QoR-9 questionnaire as a marker of postoperative recovery showed only a moderate correlation with ratings of patient satisfaction.

Conclusion: Until now, there is no method or questioning technique in the German language that can be recommended for a quality assurance program. Thus, further research is needed to develop tools that provide valid information with adequate resolution to allow discrimination of patient satisfaction with perioperative care.

[确定患者对麻醉护理满意度的简单提问方法的交叉验证]。
前言:围手术期护理患者满意度评价是现代质量管理的重要组成部分。为此目的,在临床实践或临床试验报告中经常使用简单的提问技巧。然而,很少有研究来调查这些工具和方法是否有用并提供有效的信息。方法:对200例择期手术患者进行访谈。在过去的几年中,在国际和德国文献中使用的五种不同的简单技术或问题以随机顺序与QoR-9问卷的有效德语翻译一起应用,以衡量恢复质量。所有的分析都是描述性的。结果:95% ~ 100%的人可以在没有他人帮助的情况下回答问题。所有关于满意度的简单二分法问题都不足以区分满意和不满意的患者。使用德国学校系统(1 - 6)和视觉模拟量表(VAS;0 - 100 mm)的评分分别低于10%和11%的患者的最大可能值。此外,这些工具所提供的灵活性并没有被患者利用。QoR-9问卷作为术后恢复的标志,结果显示与患者满意度评分只有中等相关性。结论:到目前为止,还没有一种可以推荐用于质量保证计划的德语方法或提问技术。因此,需要进一步的研究来开发工具,提供有效的信息和足够的分辨率,以便区分患者对围手术期护理的满意度。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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