Patient Experience Measures Research Articles

Financial Toxicity and Patient Experience Outcomes on a Multi-Institutional Phase I Single Fraction Stereotactic Partial Breast Irradiation Protocol for Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Given the demonstrated financial toxicity (FT) of radiation treatment on breast cancer patients shown in both conventional and our recent 5 fraction stereotactic APBI (S-PBI) study, we assessed the FT, as well as patient-reported utility, quality-of-life and patient experience measures, on patients treated in our phase I single fraction S-PBI trial. A phase I single fraction dose escalation trial of S-PBI for early-stage breast cancer was conducted. Women with in-situ or stage I-II (AJCC 6) invasive breast cancer following breast conserving surgery were treated with S-PBI in 1 fraction to a total dose of 22.5, 26.5 or 30 Gy (Clinical trials.gov ID NCT02685332). At one month follow-up, patients were asked to complete our novel "Patient Perspective Cost and Convenience of Care Questionnaire". Patients also completed the EQ-5D-5L, including the visual analogue scale of overall health (VAS), at enrollment, 6, 12-, 24-, 36-, and 48-month follow-up. Of 29 patients enrolled and treated, questionnaire data was available for all patients. Our trial encompassed a wide range of annual household incomes, education, and employment status. Overall, 44.8% (n = 13/29) of patients reported that radiation treatment presented a financial burden. Interestingly, no demographic information, such as patient race, marital status, education, household income, or employment during treatment predicted perceived FT. Patients reporting FT trended towards younger age (median 64 vs 70.5) and having a cancer related co-pay similar to our 5 fraction S-PBI FT trial; however, due to the small size of this study, this did not reach significance (p = 0.24 and 0.10, respectively). VAS and utility scores were calculated per the EQ-5D-5L and remained unchanged from baseline through 4-year follow-up. Likewise, there was no difference in the utility or VAS between patients who reported FT and those who did not. Interestingly, while patient reported cosmesis was similar for all patients at enrollment, patients who reported FT noted significantly worse cosmesis scores (fair/poor vs good/excellent) at 6 month and 2-year follow-ups (p = 0.01 and 0.04, respectively). Finally, patients were surveyed on treatment related disruption to their daily activities and enjoyment of life. The median values were 0 (scale 0-10, with 0 being no disruption) regardless of perceived FT. Patients were also uniformly satisfied with treatment time with a median score of 10 (scale 0-10, 10 being most satisfied). Here, we show that despite using SPBI in a single fraction, nearly half of the patients treated still reported FT of treatment. Importantly, single fraction S-PBI has no negative impact on patient VAS or utility scores, and all patients were uniformly satisfied with treatment time without significant disruption to their life.

Patient experiences of Cytosponge: a qualitative study

ObjectiveCytosponge is a novel technology for oesophageal pathology diagnosis. Uses include diagnosis of Barrett’s oesophagus and as a triage tool to prioritise upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patient experience is a key...

Patients' Satisfaction With the Quality of Services at Primary Healthcare Centers in Saudi Arabia.

Patients' satisfaction is an essential indicator used to measure the quality of healthcare services. The evaluation of patients' satisfaction with primary healthcare center(PHC) visits is therefore essential when it comes to assessing the quality of healthcare services provided. To assess patients' overall satisfaction with the quality of services provided at PHCs in different regions of Saudi Arabia. A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted using secondary data collected from 2,390 PHCs in different regions of Saudi Arabia. Data were collected by the Patient Experience Measurement Program in the Ministry of Health (MOH) using the Press Ganey Survey from January 2022 to December 2022. The Press Ganey Survey is a standardized tool used by the Saudi MOH to assess patients' satisfaction with the health services provided in different specialties and healthcare facilities. The assessment tool (Press Ganey survey) involves six domains (Access, Moving through, Nurse, Care provider, Personal issue, and Overall assessment). The data were tabulated and analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). In total, there were 536,406 study participants, with their mean age being 28.7±21.1. The overall patients' satisfaction score was 4.2 out of 5 (83.8%). Male participants reported more satisfaction with PHC services than did females (86.6%, 81%), respectively. The domain with the highest patients' satisfaction scores was that of theCare provider (84.8%), while the domain with the lowest rating was Moving through (82.8%). This baseline study found that patients were generally satisfied, with the highest levels of satisfaction with their care providers, highlighting the crucial role of professionals in the patient experience.Further research is recommended to give a more in-depth analysis and thus highlight additional correlating and predicted elements of patients' satisfaction with PHC treatments in Saudi Arabia.

Patient Consumerism and Its Influence on the Future of Occupational Therapy.

The cost of care is shifting to the individual in the form of high-deductible health plans and health savings accounts. The public demands and expects innovation in health care and health delivery and is using quality and cost data to make purchasing decisions. Public expectations for convenience are demonstrated in the use of walk-in clinics, telemedicine, and other technologies. As a result of the responsibility for paying and managing one's own health, consumerism involves a curated approach to selecting health services. This Health Policy Perspectives column examines how consumerism influences health care policy, in particular occupational therapy service delivery. Issues that consumerism creates include (1) a lack of publicly shared cost and quality data about occupational therapy; (2) confusion in measurement of client-centered care, patient satisfaction, and patient experience; (3) inadequate incorporation of patient shared decision-making throughout the occupational therapy process; and (4) payment model restrictions in service delivery. Occupational therapy practitioners must help consumers learn, through patient shared decision-making, that occupational therapy is evidence based and produces desired outcomes, thereby both improving the quality and lowering the cost of health care. Occupational therapy practitioners must advocate for lower cost and convenient service options in the community through an array of technologies. Practice scholarship of the clinical doctorate in occupational therapy must focus on conducting consumer research related to patient experience; enhancing service delivery through quality improvement; and innovating practice for new sites and methods of service delivery, including the use of technology.

What Patient-Experience Data Reveal about Trust.

This essay analyzes two types of patient-experience data to broaden and deepen understanding of trust in health care. Analysis of patients' open-ended comments shows a close connection between patients' feelings of trust and their intent to recommend providers and provider organizations-a global measure to evaluate patients' perceptions of care experiences. Patients' comments also reveal the bidirectional building of trust between the patient and the caregiver. Trust gets built when patients perceive their caregivers to trust their knowledge of their bodies as well as when caregivers demonstrate caring behaviors that earn the patients' trust. Patients' ratings of a closed-ended survey item on "confidence in provider" create the greatest differentiation for the global measure of patient experience-whether patients did or did not recommend a practice or provider. The essay also discusses related findings on pre-visit friction and the use of humor by the caregiver to expand understanding of trust.

Patient Satisfaction in Dental Healthcare Settings at Saudi Ministry of Health: A Descriptive Study.

Patient satisfaction is crucial for assessing healthcare quality and identifying strengths and weaknesses in healthcare organizations. In Saudi Arabia, the Ministry of Health (MOH) implemented the Patient Experience Measurement Program to enhance patient experience and healthcare quality. This study aimed to identify specific aspects of patient satisfaction with dental visits in Saudi Arabia to improve dental care quality and inform dental services development. The study used a standardized self-administered questionnaire (Health Links/Press Ganey) and analyzed surveys from patients who visited MOH-specialized dental clinics in Saudi Arabia during the first half of 2022. The dental section comprised 20 questions across five domains, with patients rating their experience on a 5-point Likert scale. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 25. A total of 964 patients were surveyed. The overall patient satisfaction with dental settings was 3.61 out of 5.0 (72.2%). The highest satisfaction score was for personal issues with the dental clinic domain (3.93/5; 78.6%), while the least satisfaction score was for access to the dental clinic domain (3.29/5; 65.8%). Among all items, the cleanliness of the facility showed the highest satisfaction score (4.11/5; 82.2%). The least satisfaction was for the ease of contacting the dental clinic (2.71/5; 54.2%). The study found high levels of satisfaction among Saudi patients with dental services provided through MOH facilities across various component domains. This highlights the crucial role of dentists in ensuring high-quality dental care and serves as an indication of the overall healthcare quality in MOH facilities.

The impact on patients of the tertiary-primary healthcare interface in kidney failure: a qualitative study.

Clinicians and patients have reported fragmentation in the primary and tertiary healthcare interface. However, perspectives of service navigation and the impacts of fragmentation are not well defined, particularly for patients transitioning to dialysis. This study aimed to define patient perspectives of the functioning of the health service interface and impacts on healthcare experiences and engagement, informing patient-centred and outcomes-focused service models. A qualitative study was conducted through semi-structured interviews with 25 dialysis patients (16 males) aged 34-78 receiving dialysis across a multi-site tertiary service. Transcripts were analysed thematically. Three main themes were identified: (1) The Changing Nature of General Practitioner (GP) Patient Relationships; (2) Ownership and Leadership in Kidney Care; and (3) The Importance of Nephrologist-GP Communications. Patients perceived an unreliable primary-tertiary service interface which lacked coordinated care and created challenges for primary care continuity. These impacted perceptions of healthcare provider expertise and confidence in healthcare systems. Patients subsequently increased the healthcare sought from tertiary kidney clinicians. The fractured interface led some to coordinate communication between health sectors, to support care quality, but this caused additional stress. A fragmented primary-tertiary healthcare interface creates challenges for patient service navigation and can negatively impact patient experiences, leading to primary care disengagement, reduced confidence in health care quality and increased stress. Future studies are imperative for assessing initiatives facilitating health system integration, including communication technologies, healthcare provider training, patient empowerment, and specific outcomes in health, economic and patient experience measures, for patients transitioning to dialysis.

Exploring patient perspectives: A qualitative inquiry into healthcare perceptions, experiences and satisfaction in Lebanon.

Patient perspectives have received increasing importance within health systems over the past four decades. Measures of patient experience and satisfaction are commonly used. However, these measures do not capture all the information that is available through engaging with patients. An improved understanding of the various types of patient perspectives and the distinctions between them is needed. The lack of such knowledge limits the usefulness of including patient perspectives as components within pay-for-performance initiatives. This study aimed to explore patient perspectives on hospital care in Lebanon. It also aimed to contribute insights that may improve the national pay-for-performance initiative and to the knowledge on engaging patients towards person-centered health systems. We conducted a qualitative study using focus group discussions with persons recently discharged after hospitalization under the coverage of the Lebanese Ministry of Public Health. This study was implemented in 2017 and involved 42 participants across eight focus groups. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the information provided by participants. Five overall themes supported by 17 categories were identified, capturing the meaning of the participants' perspectives: health is everything; being turned into second class citizens; money and personal connections make all the difference; wanting to be treated with dignity and respect; and tolerating letdown, for the sake of right treatment. The most frequently prioritized statement in a ranking exercise regarding patient satisfaction was regular contact with the patient's doctor. Patient perspectives include more than what is traditionally incorporated in measures of patient satisfaction and experience. Patient valuing of health and their perceptions on each of the health system, and access and quality of care should also be taken into account. Hospital pay-for-performance initiatives can be made more responsive through a broader consideration of these perspectives. More broadly, health systems would benefit from wider engagement of patients. We propose a framework relating patient perspectives to value-based healthcare and health system performance.

Leveraging patient experience measures as surrogate outcomes to evaluate health care interventions

Leveraging patient experience measures as surrogate outcomes to evaluate health care interventions

Development and testing of a patient-reported experience measure for cancer: A cross-sectional survey.

To develop and psychometrically test the Patient-reported Experience Measure-Cancer (PREM-C), reflecting patients' perceptions of cancer care experiences according to the Institute of Medicine domains. A three-phase cross-sectional survey was conducted. Development, reliability and validity testing of the PREM-C measure was undertaken. Data collection included three phases: firstly (development) between October and November, 2015; secondly (psychometric testing), May 2016-June, 2017, and finally, (revision and psychometric testing) May 2019-March 2020. The final PREM-C structure, created using the Institute of Medicine domains, was psychometrically sound with five factors identified in the Exploratory Factor Analysis, demonstrating internal reliability ranging from 0.8 to 0.9. Confirmatory Factor Analysis indicated the hypothesized model fitted well (Root mean square error of approximation = 0.076). External convergent and divergent validity was established with the PREM-C found to be moderately correlated with the Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire but weakly correlated with the WHOQoL-BREF. The development and testing of the PREM-C demonstrated good fit as a clinically relevant measure of ambulatory cancer patients' experiences of care. To make meaningful changes to nursing practice and health services, patient experience measures such as the PREM-C might support staff to identify areas for service improvement. Few reliable measures and less validated measures collect patients' perceptions of the quality of their healthcare provision. Rigorous psychometric testing of the newly developed PREM-C demonstrated good internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and external convergent and divergent validity. The PREM-C is a potentially relevant measure of cancer patients' experiences of care. It might be used to assess patient-centred care and guide safety and quality improvements in clinical settings. PREM-C use might inform service providers of experiences of care in their institution and inform policy and practice development. This measure is sufficiently generic, allowing potential use in other chronic disease populations. This conduct of this study was supported by the participating patients of the hospital Cancer Outpatients Service.

Provider perspectives on patient-centredness: participatory formative research and rapid analysis methods to inform the design and implementation of a facility-based HIV care improvement intervention in Zambia.

Implementation of patient-centred care (PCC) practices in HIV treatment depends on healthcare workers' (HCWs) perceptions of the acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of such practices (e.g. use of intentional, metric-driven activities to improve patient experiences). We applied rapid, rigorous formative research methods to refine a PCC intervention for future trial. In 2018, we conducted focus group discussions (FGDs) with 46 HCWs purposefully selected from two pilot sites. We elicited HCW perceptions of HIV service delivery, HCW motivation and perceived value of patient experience measures intended to improve PCC. FGDs utilized participatory methods to understand HCW responses to patient-reported care engagement challenges and Scholl's PCC Framework principles (e.g. seeing a patient as a unique person), enablers (e.g. care coordination) and activities (e.g. patient involvement). Our rapid analysis used analytic memos, thematic analysis, research team debriefs and HCW feedback to inform time-sensitive trial implementation. While HCWs nearly universally identified with and supported principles of PCC in both facilities, they raised practical barriers given the practice environment. HCWs described motivation to help patients, attached value to seeing positive health outcomes and the importance of teamwork. However, HCWs reported challenges with enablers needed to deliver PCC. HCWs cited a work culture characterized by differential power dynamics between cadres and departments restricting HCW autonomy and resource access. Barriers included inflexibility in accommodating individual patient needs due to high patient volumes, limited human resources, laboratory capacity, infrastructure and skills translating patient perspectives into practice. HCW motivation was negatively influenced by encounters with "difficult patients," and feeling "unappreciated" by management, resulting in cognitive dissonance between HCW beliefs and behaviours. However, the enactment of PCC values also occurred. Results suggested that PCC interventions should reduce practice barriers, highlighting the value of mentors who could help HCWs dynamically engage with health system constraints, to facilitate PCC. While HCWs perceived PCC principles as acceptable, they did not think it universally appropriate or feasible given the practice environment. Participatory and rapid methods provided timely insight that PCC interventions must provide clear and effective systems enabling PCC activities by measuring and mitigating relational and organizational constraints amenable to change such as inter-cadre coordination.

Healthcare Experiences Are Associated with Colorectal Cancer Mortality but only for Specific Racial Groups: a SEER-CAHPS Study

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to determine whether racial/ethnic disparities exist in patient-reported experiences with care after colorectal cancer diagnosis and whether they are associated with mortality.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of colorectal cancer patients diagnosed from 1997 to 2011, ≥ 65 years, and completed a Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey at least 6 months after a cancer diagnosis. We leverage the National Cancer Institute’s SEER-CAHPS dataset of Medicare beneficiaries. CAHPS survey responses were used to generate four composite measures of patient experiences with 1) getting needed care, 2) getting needed prescription drugs, 3) getting care quickly, and 4) physician communication. We used multivariable linear regression models to examine racial differences in patient experiences with aspects of their care and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to identify the risk of mortality associated with each composite score by racial group.ResultsOf the 5135 patients, 76.86% were non-Hispanic White, 7.58% non-Hispanic Black, 8.30% Hispanic, and 7.26% non-Hispanic Asian. Overall, patients reported the highest scores for composite measures regarding “getting all needed prescriptions” and the lowest score for “getting care quickly.” In our adjusted models, we found that Hispanics, non-Hispanic Black, and non-Hispanic Asian patients reported significantly lower scores for getting needed prescription drugs (B = − 4.34, B = − 4.32, B = − 5.66; all p < 0.001) compared to non-Hispanic Whites. Moreover, non-Hispanic Black patients also reported lower scores for getting care quickly (B = − 3.44, p < 0.05). We only found one statistically significant association between composite scores of patient experience and mortality. For non-Hispanic Black patients, a 3-unit increase in getting needed care was associated with 0.97 times the hazard of mortality (p = 0.003).ConclusionOur research underscores that CAHPS patient experiences with care are an important patient-centered quality-of-care metric that may be associated with cancer outcomes and that there may be differences in these relationships by race and ethnicity. Thus, highlighting how patients’ perceptions of their healthcare experiences can contribute to disparities in colorectal cancer outcomes.

The Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Clinical Practice and Clinical Decision Making.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are highly effective measures of quality of care and outcomes that matter to patients regarding their physical, mental, and social health. While PROMs have played a notable role in research and registry reporting, they are also useful as clinical tools. Real-time PROM collection can be integrated into routine clinical care with immediate access to scores within the electronic health record. This can be integral when discussing treatment options and using decision aids. PROM scores can also be useful for postoperative monitoring. Various approaches to quantifying clinical efficacy have been developed, including the minimal clinically important difference, the substantial clinical benefit, and the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS). As the patient experience and patient-reported outcome measurement of health-related outcomes become increasingly emphasized in patient-centered, high value care, so too will the importance of methods to gauge clinical benefit using these instruments for improved clinical decision-making.

Improving outcomes for hospitalised First Nations peoples through greater cultural safety and better communication: the Communicate Study Partnership study protocol

BackgroundThe Communicate Study is a partnership project which aims to transform the culture of healthcare systems to achieve excellence in culturally safe care for First Nations people. It responds to the ongoing impact of colonisation which results in First Nations peoples experiencing adverse outcomes of hospitalisation in Australia’s Northern Territory. In this setting, the majority of healthcare users are First Nations peoples, but the majority of healthcare providers are not. Our hypotheses are that strategies to ensure cultural safety can be effectively taught, systems can become culturally safe and that the provision of culturally safe healthcare in first languages will improve experiences and outcomes of hospitalisation.MethodsWe will implement a multicomponent intervention at three hospitals over 4 years. The main intervention components are as follows: cultural safety training called ‘Ask the Specialist Plus’ which incorporates a locally developed, purpose-built podcast, developing a community of practice in cultural safety and improving access to and uptake of Aboriginal language interpreters. Intervention components are informed by the ‘behaviour change wheel’ and address a supply–demand model for interpreters. The philosophical underpinnings are critical race theory, Freirean pedagogy and cultural safety. There are co-primary qualitative and quantitative outcome measures: cultural safety, as experienced by First Nations peoples at participating hospitals, and proportion of admitted First Nations patients who self-discharge. Qualitative measures of patient and provider experience, and patient-provider interactions, will be examined through interviews and observational data. Quantitative outcomes (documentation of language, uptake of interpreters (booked and completed), proportion of admissions ending in self-discharge, unplanned readmission, hospital length of stay, costs and cost benefits of interpreter use) will be measured using time-series analysis. Continuous quality improvement will use data in a participatory way to motivate change. Programme evaluation will assess Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (‘RE-AIM’).DiscussionThe intervention components are innovative, sustainable and have been successfully piloted. Refinement and scale-up through this project have the potential to transform First Nations patients’ experiences of care and health outcomes.Trial registrationRegistered with ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Record 2008644

Patient Comments on the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Clinician and Group (CG-CAHPS) Survey Reflect Improvements in Provider Behaviors From Coaching.

Patient experience survey data are used to examine the patient-centeredness of care, identify areas for improvement, and monitor interventions aimed to enhance the patient experience. Most healthcare organizations measure patient experience using Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) surveys. Studies have documented the use of CAHPS closed-ended survey responses for completing public reports, monitoring internal feedback and performance, identifying areas of improvement, and evaluating interventions to improve care. However, limited evidence exists on the utility of patients' comments on CAHPS surveys for evaluating provider-level interventions. To explore this potential, we examined comments on the CAHPS Clinician and Group (CG-CAHPS) 2.0 visit survey before and after a provider intervention. The "shadow coaching" intervention had been shown to improve provider performance and patient experience scores on the CG-CAHPS overall provider rating and provider communication composite. We examined how patient comments on the CG-CAHPS survey differed before and after shadow coaching of 74 providers. We described the valence (tone), content, and actionability of 1,935 comments-1,051 collected before coaching and 884 collected after coaching-to see how these aspects changed before and after providers were coached. Patient comments reflected improved CG-CAHPS scores after shadow coaching. The proportion of positive comments increased, and comments about doctors were more positive. Comments about time spent in the examination room decreased, apparently reflecting the decreased proportion of negative comments after coaching. Comments regarding three of the four aspects of provider communication asked on the CG-CAHPS survey were more positive after coaching (provider listens carefully, shows respect, spends enough time); the valence of comments about the fourth aspect (provider explains things in a way that is easy to understand) did not change. Also, comments describing an overall positive evaluation of the practice increased. Comments were generally less actionable after coaching, perhaps reflecting the increased positivity of the comments. Patient comments collected before the provider intervention reflected overall improvements in provider behavior, as indicated by medium-to-large statistically significant improvements in CG-CAHPS composite scores. These results suggest that patient comments from the CG-CAHPS survey can be used as input for quality improvement or an evaluation of provider-level interventions. Tracking the valence and content of comments about providers before and after an intervention to improve care is a practical method to learn how provider behavior changes.

Development and validation of a survey designed to measure patient experience of and preference for surgical wound care discharge education: A pilot study

Aim of the studyTo develop and undertake validation testing of a survey designed to measure patients’ experiences of and preferences for surgical wound care discharge education. Materials and methodsA literature review and content analysis was undertaken on patients' experiences of and preferences for surgical wound care discharge education. Four themes were uncovered in the literature (wound care discharge education, preferences for discharge education delivery, participation in wound care decisions and patient ability to manage their surgical wound to prevent wound complications), which guided item generation. Three types of validity testing occurred including: 1) face validity testing by the research team; 2) content validity testing (using Delphi study) with an international panel of experts including patients, clinicians and researchers; and 3) content validity (using pilot-testing) of the survey with seven patients from the target population. ResultsInitially 106 items were generated from the literature, and of these, 55 items were subjected to content validity testing by an international panel of 41 experts. After two Delphi rounds, 18 items were retained. Most patients provided limited and very minor feedback during pilot-testing. However, pilot-testing resulted in a revised survey administration plan to deliver the survey via telephone, including adding prompts and preambles to items. ConclusionAn 18-item survey comprised of three groups of items and an individual item was rigorously developed. The survey requires further testing among a larger sample of patients to confirm the items reflect important aspects of patients’ experiences of and preferences for surgical wound care discharge education.

Psychometric Validation of an Instrument for Measuring Patient Experiences with Outpatient Healthcare.

Recently, a patient-reported experience measure (PREM) was developed in Slovenia to assess patients' experiences with outpatient specialist healthcare clinics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties (including factor structure, reliability, convergent validity, and response distribution) of the questionnaire. The sample consisted of 8,406 adult participants treated in 171 specialist clinics from different medical fields. Participants voluntarily and anonymously responded to either the paper or online survey. Descriptive statistics show meaningful response patterns with a general tendency towards favourable assessments. The psychometric analyses of the scales evaluating doctor's and nurses' work, respectively, generally showed a good fit of the unidimensional factor model as well as the Rasch model, high factor loadings and very good to satisfactory reliability. The Rasch scaling showed that these scales were most informative for patients with relatively unfavourable experience ratings. The results are similar to those found in previous evaluations of PREMs in other countries. Given its good psychometric properties, the Slovenian PREM can be recommended for healthcare evaluations in Slovenia and as a model for the development of similar PREMs in other countries.

Validation of the accident and emergency experience questionnaire: a cross-sectional survey

BackgroundPatient feedback is an important way for healthcare providers to understand patient experience and improve the quality of care effectively and facilitate patient-centered care in the healthcare system. This study aimed to suggest a validated instrument by evaluating the psychometric properties of the Accident and Emergency Experience Questionnaire (AEEQ) for measuring patient experience in the accident and emergency department (AED) service among the adult Chinese population.MethodsAttendances aged 18 or above from all public hospitals with AEDs during 16–30 June 2016 were targeted and a cross-sectional telephone survey was conducted using AEEQ. Preliminary AEEQ consisted of 92 items, including 53 core evaluative items and 19 informative items, and the other 20 items covered socio-demographics, self-perceived health status, and free open-ended comments on AED service. Psychometric properties of the evaluative items were evaluated for practicability, content and structure validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability in this study.ResultsA total of 512 patients were recruited with a response rate of 54% and a mean age of 53.2 years old. The exploratory factor analysis suggested removing 7 items due to weak factor loadings and high cross-loading and then leaving 46 items grouped into 5 dimensions, which were care and treatment (14 items), environment and facilities (16 items), information on medication and danger signals (5 items), clinical investigation (3 items), and overall impression (8 items) to represent patient experience on AED service. The internal consistency and test-retest reliability were high with Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and Spearman’s correlation coefficient of the suggested scale of 0.845 and 0.838, respectively.ConclusionThe AEEQ is a valid and reliable instrument to evaluate the AED service which helps to build the engagement platform for promoting patient-centered care between patients and frontline healthcare professionals and improving healthcare quality in the future.

Exploring Which Patients Use Their Closest Emergency Departments Using Geocoded Data

BackgroundEach year, roughly 20% of U.S. adults visit an emergency department (ED), but little is known about patients’ choice of ED. ObjectivesExamine the discretion patients have to choose among EDs, characteristics associated with ED choice, and relationship between ED choice and self-reported care experiences of ED patients. MethodsWe surveyed adult patients discharged to the community (DTC) in January–March 2018 from 16 geographically dispersed hospital-based EDs, geocoded patient and hospital-based ED addresses within 100 miles of patient addresses, and calculated travel distances. We examined the likelihood of visiting the closest ED based on patient and ED characteristics. Linear regression models examined the association of choosing the closest ED with seven measures of patient experience of care (scaled 0–100), adjusting for patient characteristics. Results43.6% of 4647 responding patients visited the ED nearest their home (on average, 5.7 miles away). Patients who chose a farther ED had more urgent conditions, were more educated, and were less likely to be non-Hispanic White. They were significantly more likely to have visited an ED in a higher-rated, metropolitan, network hospital with major teaching status, a cardiac intensive care unit, and a certified trauma center. Patients who chose a farther ED were more likely to recommend that ED, with “medium-to-large” differences in scores (+4.3% more selected “definitely yes”, p < 0.05). ConclusionsFewer than half of patients visited the closest ED. Patients who chose a farther ED tended to seek higher-rated hospitals and report more favorable experiences.

Associations between Patient Experience and Addiction Treatment Facility Services: Results of the Addiction Treatment Locator, Assessment, and Standards Surveys.

Patient experience and presence of evidence-based facility services are 2 dimensions of assessing quality of addiction treatment facilities. However, the relationship between these two is not well described. The objective of this study was to explore associations between patient experience measures and service offerings at addiction treatment facilities. We used data from cross-sectional surveys of addiction treatment facilities and persons involved in treatment at corresponding facilities to identify facility services (eg, availability of medications for alcohol use disorder, assistance with obtaining social services, etc) and patient experience measures (overall facility rating, extent helped by treatment, ability to deal with daily problems after treatment), respectively. We used hierarchical multiple logistic regression to test for associations between top-box scores for each patient experience outcome and facility services. We analyzed 9191 patient experience surveys from 149 facilities. Assistance with obtaining social services (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval], 0.43 [0.28-0.66]) was associated with lower overall treatment facility ratings. Childcare (2.00 [1.04-3.84]) was associated with top-box scores for extent helped. Availability of cognitive behavioral therapy (2.67 [1.25-5.73]) and childcare (1.77 [1.08-2.92]) were associated with top-box scores for ability to deal with daily problems after treatment. Assistance with obtaining social services (0.61 [0.41-0.90]) was associated with lower scores for ability to deal with problems after treatment. Few addiction treatment facility services were associated with patient experience measures. Future work should explore bridging the gap between evidence-based services and positive patient experiences.