The importance of place of residence in patient satisfaction.
ABSTRACT To determine the effect of patients' place of residence on their evaluations of care, and to explore related policy implications.
We used a conditional regression analysis of stratum matched case controls to examine whether place of residence of patients living in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) or in Ontario outside of the GTA affects patient satisfaction with their experiences during hospitalization.
One hundred and six acute care hospitals located in the province of Ontario, Canada.
A total of 101 683 Ontario residents hospitalized as inpatients between 1 October 2002 and 30 June 2004.
Patient satisfaction indicators publicly reported in Ontario comprising patient perceptions of consideration, responsiveness, communication, and overall impressions, scored on a continuous scale from 1 to 100.
Patients who lived outside Toronto were consistently more satisfied than patients who lived inside Toronto when both types of patients were hospitalized in Toronto (P < 0.0001). In contrast, patients who lived inside Toronto were usually and substantially more satisfied than patients who lived outside Toronto when they were hospitalized in facilities outside Toronto (P < 0.02). These findings were consistent after adjustment for several patient-level predictor variables: age, sex, self-assessed health status and number of hospital stays in the last 6 months.
Findings suggest that where patients live has a small but potentially important impact on how they rate their care. Residence may therefore be considered when designing public reporting systems and pay-for-performance programs. Further attention to patient-level factors may be important to accurate and useful public reporting of patient satisfaction.
- SourceAvailable from: europepmc.org[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Confidence in healthcare may influence the patients' utilisation of healthcare resources and perceptions of healthcare quality. We sought to determine whether self-reported confidence in healthcare differed between the UK and the USA, as well as by rurality or urbanicity. A secondary analysis of a subset of survey questions regarding self-reported confidence in healthcare from the 2010 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey. Telephone survey of participants from the UK and the USA. Our final analysis included 1511 UK residents (688 rural, 446 suburban, 372 urban, 5 uncategorised) and 2501 US residents (536 rural, 1294 suburban, 671 urban). Questions assessed respondents' confidence in the effectiveness and affordability of the treatment. We compared survey outcomes from these questions between, and within, the two regions and among, and within, residence types (rural, suburban and urban). Significant differences were found in self-reported confidence in healthcare between the UK and US, among residence types, and between the two regions within residence types. Reported levels were higher in the UK. Within regions, significant differences by residence type were found for the US, but not the UK. Within the US, suburban respondents had the highest self-reported confidence in healthcare. Significant differences exist between the UK and US in confidence in healthcare. In the US, but not in the UK, self-reported confidence is related to residence type. Within countries, significant differences by residence type were found for the US, but not the UK. Our findings warrant the examination of causes for relative confidence levels in healthcare between regions and among US residence types.BMJ Open 05/2013; 3(5). DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002640 · 2.06 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Introduction: Patient's satisfaction is one indicator of healthcare quality. Few studies have examined the inpatient experiences in resource-scarce environments in sub-Saharan Africa. Methods: To examine patient's satisfaction on the public medical wards at a Kenyan referral hospital, we performed a cross-sectional survey focused on patient's satisfaction with medical information and their relationship with staffing and hospital routine. Ratings of communication with providers, efforts to protect privacy, information about costs, food, and hospital environment were also elicited. Results: Overall, the average patient's satisfaction rating was 64.7, nearly midway between “average” and “good” Higher rated satisfaction was associated with higher self-rated general health scores and self-rated health gains during the hospitalization (p=0.023 and p=0.001). Women who shared a hospital bed found privacy to be “below average” to “poor” Most men (72.7%) felt information about costs was insufficient. Patients rated food and environmental quality favorably while also frequently suggesting these areas could be improved. Conclusion: Overall, patients expressed satisfaction with the care provided. These ratings may reflect modest patients' expectations as well as acceptable circumstances and performance. Women expressed concern about privacy while men expressed a desire for more information on costs. Inconsistencies were noted between patient ratings and free response answers.08/2014; 18:308. DOI:10.11604/pamj.2014.18.308.4466
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background: Patient satisfaction with pharmaceutical care can be a strong predictor of medication and other health-related outcomes. Less understood is the role that location of pharmacies in urban or suburban environments plays in patient satisfaction with pharmacy and pharmacist services. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to serve as a pilot examining urban and suburban community pharmacy populations for similarities and differences in patient satisfaction. Methods: Community pharmacy patients were asked to self-administer a 30-question patient satisfaction survey. Fifteen questions addressed their relationship with the pharmacist, 10 questions addressed satisfaction and accessibility of the pharmacy, and five questions addressed financial concerns. Five urban and five suburban pharmacies agreed to participate. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and chisquare analysis. Results: Most patients reported high levels of satisfaction. Satisfaction with pharmacist relationship and service was 70% or higher with no significant differences between locations. There were significant differences between the urban and suburban patients regarding accessibility of pharmacy services, customer service and some patient/pharmacist trust issues. Conclusions: The significant differences between patient satisfaction in the suburban and urban populations warrant a larger study with more community pharmacies in other urban, suburban and rural locations to better understand and validate study findings.Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy 05/2014; 11(1). DOI:10.1016/j.sapharm.2014.05.001 · 2.35 Impact Factor