Suppr超能文献

患者满意度七种测评方法的比较研究

A comparative study of seven measures of patient satisfaction.

作者信息

Ross C K, Steward C A, Sinacore J M

机构信息

Department of Veterans Affairs, West Side Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.

出版信息

Med Care. 1995 Apr;33(4):392-406. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199504000-00006.

Abstract

The acceptability of satisfaction as a quality indicator is qualified by several well known measurement problems. This study examines the variability in satisfaction evaluations related to different measurement methods and the effect of response biases on reported satisfaction. Satisfaction evaluations using seven different, commonly used measures of patient satisfaction were obtained from the same sample of respondents. The seven measures were: 1) a global measure of satisfaction using a visual analogue scale; 2) a multidimensional measure of satisfaction based on the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire using an evaluation response format (poor, fair, good, very good, excellent); 3) a two-item overall evaluation of quality using the evaluation response format; 4) a six-item attitude measure of general satisfaction using a five-point Likert agree-disagree response format; 5) a four-item attitude measure of satisfaction with physician, using the agree-disagree response format; 6) a four-item measure of behavioral intention; and 7) willingness-to-pay in dollars. The percentage of favorable evaluations of care ranged from 63% to 82% across six of the seven measures. Willingness-to-pay does not appear to be a valid measure of satisfaction. Correlations were highest between measures with similar response formats. Although an oppositional response bias was not found, a very substantial acquiescent response bias was detected. Acquiescence reduced the internal consistency of three multiple-item measures, the general and physician attitude and behavioral intention measures, to levels unacceptable even for group comparisons. Between highly and nonacquiescent respondents, levels of satisfaction were somewhat lower for the multidimensional measure of satisfaction and significantly lower for the two attitude satisfaction measures. Highly acquiescent respondents were older, less well educated, and in poorer health than nonacquiescent subjects. Results of satisfaction evaluations dependent on the measurement method used, and unreliability of measurement may be a significant problem in satisfaction measurement, especially for the oldest and most ill patients.

摘要

满意度作为质量指标的可接受性受到几个众所周知的测量问题的限制。本研究考察了与不同测量方法相关的满意度评价的变异性以及应答偏差对报告的满意度的影响。使用七种不同的、常用的患者满意度测量方法,从同一组受访者样本中获得了满意度评价。这七种测量方法分别是:1)使用视觉模拟量表的总体满意度测量;2)基于患者满意度问卷、采用评价性应答格式(差、一般、好、非常好、优秀)的多维满意度测量;3)采用评价性应答格式的两项质量总体评价;4)采用五点李克特同意-不同意应答格式的六项总体满意度态度测量;5)采用同意-不同意应答格式的四项对医生满意度的态度测量;6)四项行为意向测量;7)以美元计的支付意愿。在这七种测量方法中的六种中,对医疗护理的正面评价百分比在63%至82%之间。支付意愿似乎不是一种有效的满意度测量方法。具有相似应答格式的测量方法之间的相关性最高。虽然未发现对立应答偏差,但检测到非常显著的默许应答偏差。默许降低了三项多项目测量(总体态度、医生态度和行为意向测量)的内部一致性,使其达到甚至对于组间比较都不可接受的水平。在高度默许和非默许的受访者之间,多维满意度测量的满意度水平略低,而两项态度满意度测量的满意度水平则显著较低。高度默许的受访者比非默许的受访者年龄更大、受教育程度更低、健康状况更差。满意度评价结果取决于所使用的测量方法,并且测量的不可靠性可能是满意度测量中的一个重大问题,尤其是对于年龄最大和病情最严重的患者。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验