Yvonne Versluijs, Amirreza Fatehi, Amanda I Gonzalez, Lee Reichel, David Laverty, David Ring
{"title":"使用迭代量表测量与患者满意度相关的因素。","authors":"Yvonne Versluijs, Amirreza Fatehi, Amanda I Gonzalez, Lee Reichel, David Laverty, David Ring","doi":"10.1097/QMH.0000000000000352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Patient experience measures tend to have notable ceiling effects that make it difficult to learn from gradations of satisfaction to improve care. This study tested 2 different iterative satisfaction measures after a musculoskeletal specialty care visit in the hope that they might have less ceiling effect. We measured floor effects, ceilings effects, skewness, and kurtosis of both questionnaires. We also assessed patient factors independently associated with the questionnaires and the top 2 possible scores.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, 186 patients completed questionnaires while seeing 1 of 11 participating orthopedic surgeons in July and August 2019; the questionnaire measured: (1) demographics, (2) symptoms of depression, (3) catastrophic thinking in response to nociception, (4) heightened illness concerns, and (5) satisfaction with the visit on 2 iterative satisfaction scales. Bivariate and multivariable analyses sought associations of the explanatory variable with the satisfaction scales.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There is a small correlation between the 2 scales ( r = 0.27; P < .001). Neither scale had a floor effect and both had a ceiling effect of 45%. There is a very small correlation between greater health anxiety and lower satisfaction measured with one of the scales ( r = -0.16; P = .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An iterative satisfaction questionnaire created some spread in patient experience data, but could not limit ceiling effects. Additional strategies are needed to remove ceiling effects from satisfaction measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":20986,"journal":{"name":"Quality Management in Health Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors Associated With Patient Satisfaction Measured Using an Iterative Scale.\",\"authors\":\"Yvonne Versluijs, Amirreza Fatehi, Amanda I Gonzalez, Lee Reichel, David Laverty, David Ring\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/QMH.0000000000000352\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Patient experience measures tend to have notable ceiling effects that make it difficult to learn from gradations of satisfaction to improve care. This study tested 2 different iterative satisfaction measures after a musculoskeletal specialty care visit in the hope that they might have less ceiling effect. We measured floor effects, ceilings effects, skewness, and kurtosis of both questionnaires. We also assessed patient factors independently associated with the questionnaires and the top 2 possible scores.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, 186 patients completed questionnaires while seeing 1 of 11 participating orthopedic surgeons in July and August 2019; the questionnaire measured: (1) demographics, (2) symptoms of depression, (3) catastrophic thinking in response to nociception, (4) heightened illness concerns, and (5) satisfaction with the visit on 2 iterative satisfaction scales. Bivariate and multivariable analyses sought associations of the explanatory variable with the satisfaction scales.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There is a small correlation between the 2 scales ( r = 0.27; P < .001). Neither scale had a floor effect and both had a ceiling effect of 45%. There is a very small correlation between greater health anxiety and lower satisfaction measured with one of the scales ( r = -0.16; P = .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An iterative satisfaction questionnaire created some spread in patient experience data, but could not limit ceiling effects. Additional strategies are needed to remove ceiling effects from satisfaction measures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20986,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quality Management in Health Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quality Management in Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/QMH.0000000000000352\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/6/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality Management in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/QMH.0000000000000352","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Factors Associated With Patient Satisfaction Measured Using an Iterative Scale.
Background and objectives: Patient experience measures tend to have notable ceiling effects that make it difficult to learn from gradations of satisfaction to improve care. This study tested 2 different iterative satisfaction measures after a musculoskeletal specialty care visit in the hope that they might have less ceiling effect. We measured floor effects, ceilings effects, skewness, and kurtosis of both questionnaires. We also assessed patient factors independently associated with the questionnaires and the top 2 possible scores.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 186 patients completed questionnaires while seeing 1 of 11 participating orthopedic surgeons in July and August 2019; the questionnaire measured: (1) demographics, (2) symptoms of depression, (3) catastrophic thinking in response to nociception, (4) heightened illness concerns, and (5) satisfaction with the visit on 2 iterative satisfaction scales. Bivariate and multivariable analyses sought associations of the explanatory variable with the satisfaction scales.
Results: There is a small correlation between the 2 scales ( r = 0.27; P < .001). Neither scale had a floor effect and both had a ceiling effect of 45%. There is a very small correlation between greater health anxiety and lower satisfaction measured with one of the scales ( r = -0.16; P = .05).
Conclusion: An iterative satisfaction questionnaire created some spread in patient experience data, but could not limit ceiling effects. Additional strategies are needed to remove ceiling effects from satisfaction measures.
期刊介绍:
Quality Management in Health Care (QMHC) is a peer-reviewed journal that provides a forum for our readers to explore the theoretical, technical, and strategic elements of health care quality management. The journal''s primary focus is on organizational structure and processes as these affect the quality of care and patient outcomes. In particular, it:
-Builds knowledge about the application of statistical tools, control charts, benchmarking, and other devices used in the ongoing monitoring and evaluation of care and of patient outcomes;
-Encourages research in and evaluation of the results of various organizational strategies designed to bring about quantifiable improvements in patient outcomes;
-Fosters the application of quality management science to patient care processes and clinical decision-making;
-Fosters cooperation and communication among health care providers, payers and regulators in their efforts to improve the quality of patient outcomes;
-Explores links among the various clinical, technical, administrative, and managerial disciplines involved in patient care, as well as the role and responsibilities of organizational governance in ongoing quality management.