O'Malley P G, Omori D M, Landry F J, Jackson J, Kroenke K
Department of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Services, F. Edward Hébert School of Medicine, Bethesda, MD 20814-4799, USA.
Acad Med. 1997 Nov;72(11):1015-7. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199711000-00023.
To assess the effect of ambulatory teaching on patients' satisfaction.
In 1996, 103 adult patients presenting to the Walter Reed General Medicine Walk-in Clinic completed a patient-satisfaction questionnaire immediately following their visits, during which they were initially seen by a trainee (third-year medical student or intern) and then seen by a faculty preceptor. The questionnaire included five items from the validated Medical Outcomes Study (MOS)-9 questionnaire as well as two open-ended questions. Fourteen staff physicians, 13 students (49% of the visits), and 11 interns (51% of the visits) participated in the study. Satisfaction was analyzed by level of training, and the responses from the study patients were compared with the responses from 372 usual-care (i.e., non-teaching) patients from the same clinic, using the chi-squared test.
The study patients were typically pleased with their encounters, rating their overall satisfaction as excellent (61%), very good (29%), or good (9%). Nearly two thirds of the patients rated their satisfaction with waiting time to be very good or excellent. Compared with the usual-care patients, the study patients reported equal or greater satisfaction for all five MOS-9 items. Ninety-five percent of the study patients said they would be willing to be seen by a trainee-staff team on future visits. There was no difference in patient satisfaction by trainee level. The study patients cited enhanced interaction (45%), enhanced education (34%), and improved care (26%) as benefits of trainee-involved care, and increased waiting time (18%) and worse care (5%) as drawbacks.
The results of this study suggest that ambulatory teaching does not adversely affect patient satisfaction, regardless of trainee level, and that patients who have been seen by trainee-staff teams are willing to experience such encounters again.
评估门诊教学对患者满意度的影响。
1996年,103名到沃尔特·里德综合内科随诊诊所就诊的成年患者在就诊后立即填写了一份患者满意度调查问卷。在就诊过程中,他们首先由一名实习生(三年级医学生或实习医生)诊治,然后由一名带教教师诊治。该问卷包括经过验证的医学结果研究(MOS)-9问卷中的五个项目以及两个开放式问题。14名 staff physicians、13名学生(占就诊次数的49%)和11名实习医生(占就诊次数的51%)参与了该研究。通过培训水平分析满意度,并使用卡方检验将研究患者的回答与来自同一诊所的372名常规护理(即非教学)患者的回答进行比较。
研究患者通常对他们的就诊经历感到满意,将他们的总体满意度评为优秀(61%)、非常好(29%)或良好(9%)。近三分之二的患者将他们对等待时间的满意度评为非常好或优秀。与常规护理患者相比,研究患者对MOS-9的所有五个项目的满意度相同或更高。95%的研究患者表示他们愿意在未来的就诊中由实习生- staff physicians团队诊治。患者满意度在实习生水平上没有差异。研究患者认为实习生参与护理的好处包括互动增强(45%)、教育增强(34%)和护理改善(26%),缺点包括等待时间增加(18%)和护理变差(5%)。
本研究结果表明,门诊教学不会对患者满意度产生不利影响,无论实习生水平如何,并且接受过实习生- staff physicians团队诊治的患者愿意再次经历这样的就诊。