University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, BerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, Madison, Wisconsin.
West J Emerg Med. 2019 May;20(3):454-459. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2019.4.41040. Epub 2019 Apr 26.
Most emergency departments (ED) use patient experience surveys (i.e., Press Ganey) that include specific physician assessment fields. Our ED group currently staffs two EDs - one at a large, tertiary-care hospital, and the other at a small, affiliated, community site. Both are staffed by the same physicians. The goals of this study were to determine whether Press Ganey ED satisfaction scores for emergency physicians working at two different sites were consistent between sites, and to identify factors contributing to any variation.
We conducted a retrospective study of patients seen at either ED between September 2015 and March 2016 who returned a Press Ganey satisfaction survey. We compiled a database linking the patient visit with his or her responses on a 1-5 scale to questions that included "overall rating of emergency room care" and five physician-specific questions. Operational metrics including time to room, time to physician, overall length of stay, labs received, prescriptions received, demographic data, and the attending physician were also linked. We averaged scores for physicians staffing both EDs and compared them between sites using t-tests. Multiple logistic regression was used to determine the impact of visit-specific metrics on survey scores.
A total of 1,012 ED patients met the inclusion criteria (site 1=457; site 2=555). The overall rating-of-care metric was significantly lower at the tertiary-care hospital ED compared to our lower volume ED (4.30 vs 4.65). The same trend was observed when the five doctor-specific metrics were summed (22.06 vs 23.32). Factors that correlated with higher scores included arrival-to-first-attending time (p=0.013) and arrival-to-ED-departure time (p=0.038), both of which were longer at the tertiary-care hospital ED.
Press Ganey satisfaction scores for the same group of emergency physicians varied significantly between sites. This suggests that these scores are more dependent on site-specific factors, such as wait times, than a true representation of the quality of care provided by the physician.
大多数急诊科(ED)使用患者体验调查(即 Press Ganey),其中包括特定医生评估领域。我们的 ED 团队目前在两个 ED 工作 - 一个在大型三级保健医院,另一个在一个小的附属社区场所。两者都由同一位医生提供服务。这项研究的目的是确定在两个不同地点工作的急诊医生的 Press Ganey ED 满意度评分是否在两个地点之间一致,并确定导致任何差异的因素。
我们对 2015 年 9 月至 2016 年 3 月期间在任何一个 ED 就诊并返回 Press Ganey 满意度调查的患者进行了回顾性研究。我们编制了一个数据库,将患者就诊与他或她对 1-5 分的回答联系起来,其中包括“急诊室护理的总体评价”和五个医生特定问题。还将操作指标(包括进入房间的时间、与医生见面的时间、总住院时间、接受的实验室检查、收到的处方、人口统计数据和主治医生)与调查结果联系起来。我们平均了在两个 ED 工作的医生的评分,并使用 t 检验比较了两个地点之间的评分。使用多因素逻辑回归确定就诊特定指标对调查评分的影响。
共有 1012 名 ED 患者符合纳入标准(站点 1=457;站点 2=555)。与我们的低容量 ED 相比,三级保健医院 ED 的总体护理评价指标明显较低(4.30 对 4.65)。当将五个医生特定指标相加时,也观察到了相同的趋势(22.06 对 23.32)。与较高评分相关的因素包括到达主治医生的时间(p=0.013)和到达 ED 出发时间(p=0.038),这两个时间在三级保健医院 ED 都更长。
同一组急诊医生的 Press Ganey 满意度评分在两个地点之间差异很大。这表明这些评分更多地取决于特定地点的因素,例如等待时间,而不是医生提供护理质量的真实代表。