Peytremann-Bridevaux Isabelle, Scherer Frédy, Peer Laurence, Cathieni Federico, Bonsack Charles, Cléopas Agatta, Kolly Véronique, Perneger Thomas V, Burnand Bernard
Health Services Research Unit, Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Lausanne, 17 Bugnon, CH-1005 Lausanne, Switzerland.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2006 Aug 28;6:108. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-6-108.
While there is interest in measuring the satisfaction of patients discharged from psychiatric hospitals, it might be important to determine whether surveys of psychiatric patients should employ generic or psychiatry-specific instruments. The aim of this study was to compare two psychiatric-specific and one generic questionnaires assessing patients' satisfaction after a hospitalisation in a psychiatric hospital.
We randomised adult patients discharged from two Swiss psychiatric university hospitals between April and September 2004, to receive one of three instruments: the Saphora-Psy questionnaire, the Perceptions of Care survey questionnaire or the Picker Institute questionnaire for acute care hospitals. In addition to the comparison of response rates, completion time, mean number of missing items and mean ceiling effect, we targeted our comparison on patients and asked them to answer ten evaluation questions about the questionnaire they had just completed.
728 out of 1550 eligible patients (47%) participated in the study. Across questionnaires, response rates were similar (Saphora-Psy: 48.5%, Perceptions of Care: 49.9%, Picker: 43.4%; P = 0.08), average completion time was lowest for the Perceptions of Care questionnaire (minutes: Saphora-Psy: 17.7, Perceptions of Care: 13.7, Picker: 17.5; P = 0.005), the Saphora-Psy questionnaire had the largest mean proportion of missing responses (Saphora-Psy: 7.1%, Perceptions of Care: 2.8%, Picker: 4.0%; P < 0.001) and the Perceptions of Care questionnaire showed the highest ceiling effect (Saphora-Psy: 17.1%, Perceptions of Care: 41.9%, Picker: 36.3%; P < 0.001). There were no differences in the patients' evaluation of the questionnaires.
Despite differences in the intended target population, content, lay-out and length of questionnaires, none appeared to be obviously better based on our comparison. All three presented advantages and drawbacks and could be used for the satisfaction evaluation of psychiatric inpatients. However, if comparison across medical services or hospitals is desired, using a generic questionnaire might be advantageous.
尽管人们对衡量从精神病医院出院患者的满意度很感兴趣,但确定针对精神病患者的调查应采用通用工具还是精神病学专用工具可能很重要。本研究的目的是比较两份精神病学专用问卷和一份通用问卷,以评估精神病医院住院患者的满意度。
我们将2004年4月至9月间从瑞士两家精神病学大学医院出院的成年患者随机分组,让他们接受三种工具之一:Saphora-Psy问卷、护理感知调查问卷或急性护理医院的皮克尔研究所问卷。除了比较回复率、完成时间、平均缺失项目数和平均天花板效应外,我们还针对患者进行比较,让他们回答十个关于他们刚刚完成的问卷的评价问题。
1550名符合条件的患者中有728名(47%)参与了研究。在所有问卷中,回复率相似(Saphora-Psy:48.5%,护理感知:49.9%,皮克尔:43.4%;P = 0.08),护理感知调查问卷的平均完成时间最短(分钟:Saphora-Psy:17.7,护理感知:13.7,皮克尔:17.5;P = 0.005),Saphora-Psy问卷的平均缺失回复比例最大(Saphora-Psy:7.1%,护理感知:2.8%,皮克尔:4.0%;P < 0.001),护理感知调查问卷的天花板效应最高(Saphora-Psy:17.1%,护理感知:41.9%,皮克尔:36.3%;P < 0.001)。患者对问卷的评价没有差异。
尽管问卷在预期目标人群、内容、布局和长度方面存在差异,但根据我们的比较,似乎没有一个明显更好。所有三种问卷都有优缺点,可用于评估精神病住院患者的满意度。然而,如果希望在医疗服务或医院之间进行比较,使用通用问卷可能更有利。