Suppr超能文献

耳鼻喉科的患者满意度:学术机构能与之竞争吗?

Patient satisfaction in otolaryngology: Can academic institutions compete?

机构信息

Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

出版信息

Laryngoscope. 2012 May;122(5):1000-9. doi: 10.1002/lary.23255. Epub 2012 Mar 27.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Public reporting and transparency of patient experience is an emerging national healthcare priority. The objectives of this report are to describe patient satisfaction scores in ambulatory otolaryngology and examine the association of teaching status across multiple service domains.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional patient-level analysis of Press Ganey outpatient medical practice surveys completed by otolaryngology patients in fiscal year 2010.

METHODS

The survey contains 29 Likert-scaled items that comprise an overall score and scores in six service domains: access, visit, nursing, care provider, personal issues, and assessment. The item "likelihood-to-recommend practice" was measured as an indicator of patient loyalty. Surveys were grouped according to teaching or nonteaching setting. Mean scores were compared by Kruskal-Wallis rank test for nonparametric data with Bonferroni's correction for multiple comparisons. A dichotomous variable (ALL-5s) was created to measure percentages of surveys with highest scores in each domain. Multivariate logistic regression adjusting for sex, age, geographical region, urban-rural status, and first visit was performed to evaluate the association of teaching status with ALL-5s in each domain. Pearson correlation (r) was used to evaluate correlation of individual survey items to the "likelihood-to-recommend practice" question.

RESULTS

A total of 36,089 surveys were included, of which 16,057 (44%) were from a teaching setting. The mean age of respondents was 54.1 years (range, 0-90 years), and 52.7% were female. Patients seen in the teaching setting had lower mean scores overall and in domains of access, visit, and personal issues (P = .004) but had higher mean scores for likelihood-to-recommend practice (P = .007). No differences were identified between groups in domains of nursing, care provider, and assessment. Multivariate analysis of association of teaching setting with ALL-5s demonstrated that patients in a teaching setting were more likely to have the highest scores (ALL-5s) in the domain of nursing (OR, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.16; P = .002) and for the loyalty question of "likelihood-to-recommend practice" (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05-1.19; P = .001), and less likely to have highest scores for the overall survey (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.83-0.93; P < .001) and domains of access (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84-0.94;P < .001) and visit (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.85-0.94; P < .001). No association was identified between teaching status and domains of care provider, personal issues, and assessment. Survey items correlated with likelihood-to-recommend practice were similar between groups. Items most closely correlated with loyalty were all within the care provider domain consisting of "likelihood-to-recommend care provider" (r = 0.839), "confidence in care provider" (r = 0.785), and "concern care provider showed" (r = 0.733; P < .001). Items least closely correlated were within the visit domain related to waiting room comfort (r = 0.467), registration speed (r = 0.447), and wait time (r = 0.432; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Otolaryngology patients evaluated in the teaching setting report lower patient satisfaction overall, primarily related to access to care and visit-specific processes; however, they are more likely to display loyalty and recommend their practice and care provider. The teaching setting does not influence care provider satisfaction scores. Because practice loyalty is most closely correlated to provider-specific behaviors, otolaryngologists may consider enhancement of provider-patient communication to improve patient satisfaction regardless of the practice setting. Academic otolaryngology practices should consider focusing on access systems and process improvement to enhance the overall patient experience.

摘要

目的

患者体验的公开报告和透明度是国家医疗保健的一个新兴重点。本报告的目的是描述门诊耳鼻喉科患者的满意度评分,并研究多个服务领域的教学状态的关联。

研究设计

对 2010 财年接受耳鼻喉科门诊医疗实践调查的患者进行的患者水平的横断面分析。

方法

该调查包含 29 个李克特量表项目,构成了总体评分和六个服务领域的评分:就诊途径、就诊体验、护理、医疗服务提供者、个人问题和评估。“推荐意愿”这一项被用来衡量患者忠诚度的指标。根据教学或非教学环境对调查进行分组。使用 Kruskal-Wallis 秩检验对非参数数据进行比较,Bonferroni 校正用于多次比较。创建一个二分变量(ALL-5s)来衡量每个领域中得分最高的调查百分比。调整性别、年龄、地理位置、城乡状况和初次就诊后,进行多变量逻辑回归以评估教学状态与每个领域的 ALL-5s 的相关性。使用 Pearson 相关系数(r)评估个别调查项目与“推荐意愿”问题的相关性。

结果

共纳入 36089 份调查,其中 16057 份(44%)来自教学环境。受访者的平均年龄为 54.1 岁(范围,0-90 岁),其中 52.7%为女性。在教学环境中就诊的患者总体和就诊途径、就诊体验和个人问题等领域的平均得分较低(P =.004),但推荐意愿的平均得分较高(P =.007)。两组在护理、医疗服务提供者和评估领域之间没有差异。教学环境与 ALL-5s 的相关性的多变量分析表明,教学环境中的患者更有可能在护理领域(OR,1.09;95%置信区间 [CI],1.03-1.16;P =.002)和“推荐意愿”的忠诚度问题(OR,1.12;95% CI,1.05-1.19;P =.001)上获得最高分数,而在总体调查(OR,0.88;95% CI,0.83-0.93;P <.001)和就诊途径(OR,0.89;95% CI,0.84-0.94;P <.001)以及就诊体验(OR,0.89;95% CI,0.85-0.94;P <.001)的最高分数方面不太可能。教学状态与医疗服务提供者、个人问题和评估领域之间没有关联。与推荐意愿相关的调查项目在两组之间相似。与忠诚度最密切相关的项目都在医疗服务提供者领域,包括“推荐医疗服务提供者的意愿”(r = 0.839)、“对医疗服务提供者的信心”(r = 0.785)和“关心医疗服务提供者的表现”(r = 0.733;P <.001)。相关性最小的项目都与候诊室舒适度(r = 0.467)、登记速度(r = 0.447)和等待时间(r = 0.432;P <.001)等就诊体验相关。

结论

在教学环境中评估的耳鼻喉科患者的总体满意度较低,主要与就诊途径和就诊体验相关的流程有关;然而,他们更有可能表现出忠诚度并推荐他们的实践和医疗服务提供者。教学环境不会影响医疗服务提供者满意度评分。由于实践忠诚度与特定于提供者的行为最密切相关,耳鼻喉科医生可能会考虑增强医患沟通,以提高患者满意度,而不管实践环境如何。学术耳鼻喉科实践应考虑专注于访问系统和流程改进,以增强整体患者体验。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验