Can we use patient-reported feedback to drive change? The challenges of using patient-reported feedback and how they might be addressed

Flott, Kelsey; Graham, Chris; Darzi, Ara; Mayer, Erik

doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005223

Cited by 64 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

101

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Even though improving patient care experiences is increasingly being incorporated in both local and global health agendas, patient feedback remains largely underutilized in local hospital improvement plans . One of the main reasons for this is lack of specific and timely feedback that is easily translatable to improvements on the frontline . Current instruments used to collect patient experience data mostly collect data on hospital‐wide level for identification of larger national trends and contracting of hospital services.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Closing the patient experience chasm: A two‐level validation of the Consumer Quality Index Inpatient Hospital Care

Smirnova

Lombarts

Arah

et al. 2017

Health Expectations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundEvaluation of patients’ health care experiences is central to measuring patient‐centred care. However, different instruments tend to be used at the hospital or departmental level but rarely both, leading to a lack of standardization of patient experience measures.ObjectiveTo validate the Consumer Quality Index (CQI) Inpatient Hospital Care for use on both department and hospital levels.DesignUsing cross‐sectional observational data, we investigated the internal validity of the questionnaire using confirmatory factor analyses (CFA), and the generalizability of the questionnaire for use at the department and hospital levels using generalizability theory.Setting and participants22924 adults hospitalized for ≥24 hours between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2014 in 23 Dutch hospitals (515 department evaluations).Main variable CQI Inpatient Hospital Care questionnaire.Results CFA results showed a good fit on individual level (CFI=0.96, TLI=0.95, RMSEA=0.04), which was comparable between specialties. When scores were aggregated to the department level, the fit was less desirable (CFI=0.83, TLI=0.81, RMSEA=0.06), and there was a significant overlap between communication with doctors and explanation of treatment subscales. Departments and hospitals explained ≤5% of total variance in subscale scores. In total, 4‐8 departments and 50 respondents per department are needed to reliably evaluate subscales rated on a 4‐point scale, and 10 departments with 100‐150 respondents per department for binary subscales.Discussion and conclusionsThe CQI Inpatient Hospital Care is a valid and reliable questionnaire to evaluate inpatient experiences in Dutch hospitals provided sufficient sampling is done. Results can facilitate meaningful comparisons and guide quality improvement activities in individual departments and hospitals.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Closing the patient experience chasm: A two‐level validation of the Consumer Quality Index Inpatient Hospital Care

Smirnova

Lombarts

Arah

et al. 2017

Health Expectations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This could have implications for quality improvement initiatives, as segmenting the patient population by their medical needs could enable patients' feedback to indicate where quality improvements are required for specific groups. Other industries have been successful in understanding where to make improvements for consumers through data segmentation techniques that identify specific groups within the population (Flott et al 2016).…”

Section: Interpretation Of Results and Implications For Health Servicmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other industries have been successful in understanding where to make improvements for consumers through data segmentation techniques that identify specific groups within the population (Flott et al. ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying Primary Care Pathways from Quality of Care to Outcomes and Satisfaction Using Structural Equation Modeling

Ricci‐Cabello

Stevens

Dalton

et al. 2017

Health Services Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To study the relationships between the different domains of quality of primary health care for the evaluation of health system performance and for informing policy decision making. Data Sources. A total of 137 quality indicators collected from 7,607 English practices between 2011 and 2012. Study Design. Cross-sectional study at the practice level. Indicators were allocated to subdomains of processes of care ("quality assurance," "education and training," "medicine management," "access," "clinical management," and "patient-centered care"), health outcomes ("intermediate outcomes" and "patient-reported health status"), and patient satisfaction. The relationships between the subdomains were hypothesized in a conceptual model and subsequently tested using structural equation modeling. Principal Findings. The model supported two independent paths. In the first path, "access" was associated with "patient-centered care" (b = 0.63), which in turn was strongly associated with "patient satisfaction" (b = 0.88). In the second path, "education and training" was associated with "clinical management" (b = 0.32), which in turn was associated with "intermediate outcomes" (b = 0.69). "Patient-reported health status" was weakly associated with "patient-centered care" (b = À0.05) and "patient satisfaction" (b = 0.09), and not associated with "clinical management" or "intermediate outcomes." Conclusions. This is the first empirical model to simultaneously provide evidence on the independence of intermediate health care outcomes, patient satisfaction, and health status. The explanatory paths via technical quality clinical management and patient centeredness offer specific opportunities for the development of quality improvement initiatives.

show abstract

“…We are well aware of the fact that the surveys used in the studies described in the article of Flott et al 1 are much larger and more complex than the one we used in our study. We just wanted to show that a learning point could be: don’t overcomplicate.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With great interest we read the article of Flott et al 1 describing the challenges of using patient-reported feedback. We recognise the challenges described and performed a bachelor project in the intensive care unit (ICU) in the University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Simple example of a practical solution to make patient feedback more useful

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Can we use patient-reported feedback to drive change? The challenges of using patient-reported feedback and how they might be addressed

Cited by 64 publications

References 21 publications

Closing the patient experience chasm: A two‐level validation of the Consumer Quality Index Inpatient Hospital Care

Closing the patient experience chasm: A two‐level validation of the Consumer Quality Index Inpatient Hospital Care

Identifying Primary Care Pathways from Quality of Care to Outcomes and Satisfaction Using Structural Equation Modeling

Simple example of a practical solution to make patient feedback more useful

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About