Patient feedback and anaesthetists: what are patients assessing and why?

McGrady, Elizabeth

doi:10.1111/anae.12421

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The implementation of an MSF system for Italian anesthesiologists as for other anesthesiologists [20,23], can provide constructive feedback about the relevant domains of clinical practice, management and professionalism directly from those who interact with the clinician on a daily basis and have direct observation of these behaviors. Further study is warranted to assess the external validity of these instruments in evaluating anesthesiologists' professionalism and other aspects of clinical practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Different respondents focus on characteristics of the physician that they can assess (e.g., patients are not expected to assess a physician's clinical expertise) and together provide a more comprehensive evaluation than what could be derived by any one source alone [17]. Previous studies suggest that patient's feedback is important, as it allows to assess doctors' communication skills, which involve a combination of conscious and unconscious processes and responses [18], and their ability to inspire trust and to make the patient feel involved in the decision-making about their treatment [19,20].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing anaesthesiology and intensive care specialty physicians: An Italian language multisource feedback system

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Physician professionalism, including anaesthesiologists and intensive care doctors, should be continuously assessed during training and subsequent clinical practice. Multi-source feedback (MSF) is an assessment system in which healthcare professionals are assessed on several constructs (e.g., communication, professionalism, etc.) by multiple people (medical colleagues, coworkers, patients, self) in their sphere of influence. MSF has gained widespread acceptance for both formative and summative assessment of professionalism for reflecting on how to improve clinical practice. Methods Instrument development and psychometric analysis (feasibility, reliability, construct validity via exploratory factor analysis) for MSF questionnaires in a postgraduate specialty training in Anaesthesiology and intensive care in Italy. Sixty-four residents at the Università del Piemonte Orientale (Italy) Anesthesiology Residency Program. Main outcomes assessed were: development and psychometric testing of 4 questionnaires: self, medical colleague, coworker and patient assessment. Results Overall 605 medical colleague questionnaires (mean of 9.3 ±1.9) and 543 coworker surveys (mean 8.4 ±1.4) were collected providing high mean ratings for all items (> 4.0 /5.0). The self-assessment item mean score ranged from 3.1 to 4.3. Patient questionnaires (n = 308) were returned from 31 residents (40%; mean 9.9 ± 6.2). Three items had high percentages of “unable to assess” (> 15%) in coworker questionnaires. Factor analyses resulted in a two-factor solution: clinical management with leadership and accountability accounting for at least 75% of the total variance for the medical colleague and coworker’s survey with high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s α > 0.9). Patient’s questionnaires had a low return rate, a limited exploratory analysis was performed. Conclusions We provide a feasible and reliable Italian language MSF instrument with evidence of construct validity for the self, coworkers and medical colleague. Patient feedback was difficult to collect in our setting.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing anaesthesiology and intensive care specialty physicians: An Italian language multisource feedback system

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Apart from communication skills, other high predictors of patient satisfaction included empathy, a well balanced patient–anaesthetist relationship, clinicians’ soft skills, and emotional support [1]. Interpersonal skills such as friendliness, helpfulness and communication helped increase patient satisfaction with anaesthesia [53]. Likewise, such an approach led to fewer employee complaints and enhanced contentment in the treating team [53].…”

Section: The Engaged Physicianmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient satisfaction in anesthesiology: a narrative review

Bello

Nübling²,

Luedi

et al. 2023

Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of review Healthcare is increasingly expanding its view in outcome discussions to integrate patient-reported outcomes such as patient satisfaction. Involving patients in the evaluation of services and the development of quality improvement strategies is paramount, especially in the service-oriented discipline of anaesthesiology. Recent findings Currently, while the development of validated patient satisfaction questionnaires is well established, the use of rigorously tested scores in research and clinical practice is not standardized. Furthermore, most questionnaires are validated for specific settings, which limits our ability to draw relevant conclusions from them, especially considering the rapidly expanding scope of anaesthesia as a discipline and the addition of same-day surgery. Summary For this manuscript, we review recent literature regarding patient satisfaction in the inpatient and ambulatory anaesthesia setting. We discuss ongoing controversies and briefly digress to consider management and leadership science regarding ‘customer satisfaction’.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, it is also appreciated that patients who view their doctors as unfriendly, unhelpful, or uncommunicative are more likely to complain. It has been argued that if doctors with poor communication skills improved their interpersonal skills, as well as improving patient satisfaction, it could make patients happier and less likely to complain and, therefore, make doctors happier .…”

Section: Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%