An evaluation of a patient satisfaction survey: validity and reliability
Introduction
Managed health care has produced competition among providers on the basis of service level with patient satisfaction serving as an important indicator. From a clinical perspective, patient satisfaction is considered an integral and critical part of quality care (Bowman et al., 1992, Clearly et al., 1989, Ruggeri et al., 1996, van Campen et al., 1995). The interest in patient satisfaction has caused many health care providers to revisit the quality of patient satisfaction reporting and the means of obtaining satisfaction information in their organizations. Research is needed to accurately assess patient satisfaction that provides a consumer viewpoint for health care managers and clinicians who must make decisions about how to structure the care of patients (Dull et al., 1994, Russell, 1994).
Review articles assessing patient satisfaction and quality of care peaked in 1983 (van Campen et al., 1995). Reviewers identified critical problems involving the theory of patient satisfaction and the psychometric properties of existing instruments that lead to poor results. Subsequent researchers addressed these weaknesses by focusing on theory development or instrument development (Carey & Seibert, 1993, Clearly et al., 1989, Meterko & Rubin, 1990, Ruggeri et al., 1996, Williams, 1994). Theory research attempted to identify the construct of “patient satisfaction’ and discover what patients mean when they report satisfaction with medical services (Williams, 1994). Strategies for instrument development and refinement focused on choosing core items based on previous research of existing instruments and development of specific items from patient focus group interviews. According to Bowman et al. (1992), present consumer oriented instruments are very basic in design and measure only specific areas of health care, and therefore, have limited use. Further, there have been minimal efforts in the refinement and evaluation of psychometric properties of instruments using different modes of administration, such as mail and telephone surveys.
Nevertheless, research evaluating patient satisfaction surveys and psychometric properties is advancing (Dull et al., 1994). Professionals have recognized that a systematic and consumer oriented perspective toward patient viewpoints about the level of care can result in feedback useful for promoting higher quality standards of patient care. The development and use of valid and reliable instruments that report patient feedback is necessary to accurately identify the construct of “patient satisfaction”. The purpose of this study is to evaluate a southern medical center’s External Patient Satisfaction Survey (EPSS) instrument and to discuss how health care practitioners might use these results for routine and systematic assessment of the quality of medical care.
Section snippets
Research setting
The 281 bed medical center is located in the southern region of the United States. The medical center has a primary market area which includes a metropolitan statistical area of approximately 190,000 people and a surrounding rural population of approximately 135,000 people. The population is of poor health status due to a high poverty level combined with a low educational level. In-patient admissions to the medical center exceed 10,000 patients annually.
An “internal” survey process has been
Content analysis
The first step in evaluating the content validity of the EPSS was to consult current published sources associated with patient satisfaction measurement in order to identify perceptions about specific aspects of the service delivery process. Williams (1994) suggested that evaluation from the public sector includes a “consumerist ethos” rationale that recognizes the consumer “… as the central figure of accountability in all public services…” and that research into patient satisfaction has an “…
Discussion
The results of the content validity analysis indicated that the EPSS compared well to three other existing questionnaires and their respective evaluations. The nursing and doctor categories were the most notable when comparing all four studies. The three remaining categories: discharge, billing, and food/cleanliness compared most strongly in Cleary et al. (1989) and the present study. The factor analysis of this study seems to further confirm that physician’s care and nursing care are vital
Conclusions
The EPSS is currently being evaluated as part of an ongoing research program for content validity, factor analysis, and internal consistency of the instrument. The medical center’s response to the present evaluation of the EPSS has been to reconsider the way that their clinical department managers develop response plans to patient satisfaction data in light of the relationships suggested in the content validity and factor analysis. Investigation will continue with a focus on such areas as the
References (12)
- et al.
Assessment of the patient–doctor interaction scale for measuring patient satisfaction
Patient Education and Counseling
(1992) - et al.
Patient assessments of hospital care
Quality Review Bulletin
(1989) - et al.
Patient’s perspective: evaluating a patient satisfaction survey for maximum benefit
Journal of Quality Improvement
(1994) Patient satisfaction: a valid concept?
Social Science and Medicine
(1994)- et al.
A patient survey system to measure quality improvement: questionnaire reliability and validity
Medical Care
(1993) - et al.
Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings
(1987)
Cited by (38)
Patient satisfaction and quality of hospital care
2023, Evaluation and Program PlanningExceeding parents' expectations in Ear-Nose-Throat outpatient facilities: The development and analysis of a questionnaire
2012, Evaluation and Program PlanningCitation Excerpt :It has been reported that parents’ satisfaction is influenced by communication, cost, continuity of service and providers, physical environment of clinic, humanity, information, time spent on the patient, official procedures, doctors gender and nursing care (Bernhart, Wiandyana, Wihardjo, & Pohan, 1999; Delgado, Lopez-Fernandez, & Luna, 1993; Jones, Carnon, Wylie, & Hedley, 1993; McKinley, Manku-Scott, Hastings, French, & Barker, 1997; Tsai et al., 2007). Furthermore, waiting for long periods, having no alternative appointment and possessing insufficient information are the sources of dissatisfaction in outpatient clinics (Bodur, Zdemur, & Kara, 2002; Dufrene, 2000; Kojo-Austin, Malin, & Hemminki, 1993; Kurata, Nogawa, Philips, Hoffman, & Werblun, 1992). Despite these initiatives, assessment of parental satisfaction with outpatient facilities remains a largely neglected area.
Improvements in the general services of an hospital as the result of patients surveys
2010, Revista de Calidad AsistencialPrediction of patient satisfaction with care one year after burn
2009, BurnsCitation Excerpt :Studies of patient satisfaction after burn care are, however, rare. The concept of patient satisfaction is multidimensional, and contains aspects of competence and technical skill, interpersonal factors, provision of service, information, continuity, complaint management, availability and overall satisfaction [7–12]. Patient satisfaction is affected by several individual factors such as personality traits and health status [5,13], and socio-demographic variables including age [2,11,13,14], gender [11], and education [14,15].
A bed too far. The implementation of freedom of choice policy in the NHS
2008, Health PolicyPatient satisfaction in 4 hospitals of the Basque Health Service
2008, Gaceta Sanitaria