Five-point scales outperform 10-point scales in a randomized comparison of item scaling for the Patient Experiences Questionnaire

Garratt, Andrew; Helgeland, Jon; Gulbrandsen, Pål

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.016

Cited by 59 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The patient-experience questions were based on the Patient Experiences Questionnaire,7 but the response scale was changed to improve the data quality 8. All of the experience items used a five-point response format ranging from ‘not at all’ to ‘to a very large extent’.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overall patient satisfaction with hospitals: effects of patient-reported experiences and fulfilment of expectations

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overall patient satisfaction with hospitals: effects of patient-reported experiences and fulfilment of expectations

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[17,20,21] The number of respondents per organisational unit varied from 11% up to 52%. A significantly higher response rate was observed from elective patients (46%) compared to emergency patients (35%).…”

Section: Response Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

Partnership between patients and health care professionals is an important determinant of patient satisfaction

Heberer

Bourke

Wildhaber

et al. 2015

IJH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: A five year single institution survey of patient experience was analysed according to organisational units and for disease-and treatment-based patient groups to detect potential predictors of patient satisfaction. Methods: The public and academic, acute care hospital was monitored during times of change in reimbursement and ownership (2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014) and exhibited a high level of overall patient satisfaction (score 3.5/4) which remained constant over the duration of the study. Out of 134,593 in-house patients during this period, 54,686 responded (40.6%) to the 18-question survey mailed a fortnight after hospital discharge. This patient satisfaction database was merged with the medical and administrative database in order to enable subgroup analysis and factorial analysis performed. Results: Despite a high level of overall patient satisfaction there existed remarkable heterogeneity within the hospital in patient satisfaction between different organisational units or patient groups. Patient socio-demographic factors remained stable among the groups and over time and made a significant but albeit small, contribution to patient satisfaction variance: organisational units (0.7%), age (0.22%), patient origin (0.12%), gender (0.1%), type of insurance (0.04%), migration status (0.03%) and destination (post-discharge location, 0.02%). Without a significant influence was comorbidity, admission status, or length of stay. Using factorial analysis the single most relevant factor was partnership which explained 25% of the variance of patient satisfaction. Partnership or "partnership between patients and health care professionals" included coherent information exchange, involvement in decision-making and treatment with dignity and respect. Other components influencing satisfaction were responsiveness, information, family involvement and pain control (accounting for 1%-8% variance). Conclusions: The structural heterogeneity of hospitals demands the analysis of patient satisfaction in subgroups and over periods of time (trend analysis). Furthermore, "partnership between patients and the health care professionals" appears to be a factor that offers potential for quality improvement initiatives.

show abstract

“…18 The questionnaire used in the national survey comprised 73 closed-ended items. Most experience items had a 5-point response format ranging from 1 (‘not at all’) to 5 (‘to a very large extent’).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Patient-Reported Incident in Hospital Instrument (PRIH-I): assessments of data quality, test–retest reliability and hospital-level reliability

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to test the data quality, test–retest reliability and hospital-level reliability of the Patient-Reported Incident in Hospital Instrument (PRIH-I).Methods13 incident questions were included in a national patient-experience survey in Norway during the spring of 2011. All questions and a composite incident index were assessed by calculating missing-item rates, test–retest reliability and hospital-level reliability. A multivariate linear regression on a global item regarding incorrect treatment was used to assess the main sources of variation in patient-perceived incorrect treatment at hospitals.ResultsFive of the 13 patient-incident questions had a missing-item rate of >20%. Only one item met the criterion of 0.7 for test–retest reliability (wrong or delayed diagnosis), seven items had a score of >0.5, while the remainder had a reliability score of <0.5. However, the reliability was >0.7 for six of 10 items tested at the hospital level, and >0.6 for the remaining four items. A patient-incident index based on 12 of the incident items had no missing data, the test–retest reliability was 0.6 and the hospital-level reliability was 0.85.ConclusionsThe PRIH-I comprises 13 questions about patient-perceived incidents in hospitals, and can be easily and cost-effectively included in national patient-experience surveys with an acceptable increase in respondent burden. Although the missing-item rate and test–retest reliability were poor for several items, the hospital-level reliability was satisfactory for most of the items. The incident items contribute to a patient-reported incident index, with excellent data quality and hospital-level reliability.

show abstract

Five-point scales outperform 10-point scales in a randomized comparison of item scaling for the Patient Experiences Questionnaire

Cited by 59 publications

References 33 publications

Overall patient satisfaction with hospitals: effects of patient-reported experiences and fulfilment of expectations

Overall patient satisfaction with hospitals: effects of patient-reported experiences and fulfilment of expectations

Partnership between patients and health care professionals is an important determinant of patient satisfaction

The Patient-Reported Incident in Hospital Instrument (PRIH-I): assessments of data quality, test–retest reliability and hospital-level reliability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About