Gustafson D H, Arora N K, Nelson E C, Boberg E W
Center for Health Systems Research and Analysis, 1119 WARF, 610 Walnut Street, University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI 53705, USA.
Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 2001 Feb;27(2):81-92. doi: 10.1016/s1070-3241(01)27008-4.
The value of patient satisfaction surveys in health care improvement remains controversial. This study examined the value of alternative ways of identifying patient needs and estimating importance of those needs in improving the impact of satisfaction surveys.
Ninety-one acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients from three southeast U.S. community hospitals were surveyed in 1992. Critical incident and person-focused interviews were used to identify patient needs. Besides overall/global satisfaction with care, patients rated satisfaction with and importance of 12 care delivery and 18 information and support needs. Unmet need scores (importance minus satisfaction) were estimated. Derived importance scores were assessed by correlating global satisfaction with individual need satisfaction scores. A two-step process for identifying priority areas for improvement was proposed.
Patients identified and assigned greater scores to unmet needs for information and support needs (not included in typical satisfaction surveys) compared to typically assessed care delivery needs (p < 0.0001). Direct importance ratings differed substantially from those derived through correlation analyses (r = 0.28, p > 0.3 for care delivery needs and r = -0.17, p > 0.4 for information and support needs). Needs that received high importance and low satisfaction scores were all information and support needs.
Needs that patients consider very important are usually ignored in typical patient surveys. Derived approaches typically used to assess importance of need from satisfaction data may provide misleading results. If satisfaction surveys are to result in real performance improvement, a fresh examination of the content and importance assessment strategies, as proposed, is needed.
患者满意度调查在改善医疗保健方面的价值仍存在争议。本研究探讨了识别患者需求的替代方法以及评估这些需求在提高满意度调查影响方面的重要性的价值。
1992年对来自美国东南部三家社区医院的91名急性心肌梗死(AMI)患者进行了调查。采用关键事件法和以患者为中心的访谈来识别患者需求。除了对护理的总体/全球满意度外,患者还对12项护理提供需求以及18项信息和支持需求的满意度和重要性进行了评分。估计了未满足需求得分(重要性减去满意度)。通过将总体满意度与个体需求满意度得分进行相关性分析来评估衍生重要性得分。提出了一个识别优先改进领域的两步过程。
与通常评估的护理提供需求相比,患者识别出信息和支持需求(典型满意度调查中未包括)的未满足需求并给予更高分数(p < 0.0001)。直接重要性评分与通过相关性分析得出的评分有很大差异(护理提供需求r = 0.28,p > 0.3;信息和支持需求r = -0.17,p > 0.4)。获得高重要性和低满意度评分的需求均为信息和支持需求。
在典型的患者调查中,患者认为非常重要的需求通常被忽略。通常用于从满意度数据评估需求重要性的衍生方法可能会产生误导性结果。如果满意度调查要真正改善绩效,就需要如所提议的那样,重新审视内容和重要性评估策略。