Measuring Patients' Experiences with Individual Primary Care Physicians. Results of a Statewide Demonstration Project

Tufts University, Бостон, Georgia, United States
Journal of General Internal Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.42). 02/2006; 21(1):13-21. DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.00311.x
Source: PubMed


Measuring and reporting patients' experiences with health plans has been routine for several years. There is now substantial interest in measuring patients' experiences with individual physicians, but numerous concerns remain.
The Massachusetts Ambulatory Care Experiences Survey Project was a statewide demonstration project designed to test the feasibility and value of measuring patients' experiences with individual primary care physicians and their practices.
Cross-sectional survey administered to a statewide sample by mail and telephone (May-August 2002).
Adult patients from 5 commerical health plans and Medicaid sampled from the panels of 215 generalist physicians at 67 practice sites (n=9,625).
Ambulatory Care Experiences Survey produces 11 summary measures of patients' experiences across 2 domains: quality of physician-patient interactions and organizational features of care. Physician-level reliability was computed for all measures, and variance components analysis was used to determine the influence of each level of the system (physician, site, network organization, plan) on each measure. Risk of misclassifying individual physicians was evaluated under varying reporting frameworks.
All measures except 2 achieved physician-level reliability of at least 0.70 with samples of 45 patients per physician, and several exceeded 0.80. Physicians and sites accounted for the majority of system-related variance on all measures, with physicians accounting for the majority on all "interaction quality" measures (range: 61.7% to 83.9%) and sites accounting for the largest share on "organizational" measures (range: 44.8% to 81.1%). Health plans accounted for neglible variance (<3%) on all measures. Reporting frameworks and principles for assuring misclassification risk < or =2.5% were identified.
With considerable national attention on the importance of patient-centered care, this project demonstrates the feasibility of obtaining highly reliable measures of patients' experiences with individual physicians and practices. The analytic findings underscore the validity and importance of looking beyond health plans to individual physicians and sites as we seek to improve health care quality.

Download full-text


Available from: William H Rogers, Feb 07, 2015
  • Source
    • "Five items from the Ambulatory Care Experience Survey (ACES) assess patient experiences of prevention and health promotion [33]. Medical records data assess the number of health promotion/prevention services recommended by practitioners. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Integrative medicine (IM) is a clinical paradigm of whole person healthcare that combines appropriate conventional and complementary medicine (CM) treatments. Studies of integrative healthcare systems and theory-driven evaluations of IM practice models need to be undertaken. Two health services research methods can strengthen the validity of IM healthcare studies, practice theory, and fidelity evaluation. The University of Arizona Integrative Health Center (UAIHC) is a membership-supported integrative primary care clinic in Phoenix, AZ. A comparative effectiveness evaluation is being conducted to assess its clinical and cost outcomes. A process evaluation of the clinic's practice theory components assesses model fidelity for four purposes: (1) as a measure of intervention integrity to determine whether the practice model was delivered as intended; (2) to describe an integrative primary care clinic model as it is being developed and refined; (3) as potential covariates in the outcomes analyses, to assist in interpretation of findings, and for external validity and replication; and (4) to provide feedback for needed corrections and improvements of clinic operations over time. This paper provides a rationale for the use of practice theory and fidelity evaluation in studies of integrative practices and describes the approach and protocol used in fidelity evaluation of the UAIHC.
    Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 11/2013; 2013(5):652047. DOI:10.1155/2013/652047 · 1.88 Impact Factor
    • "Second, as with all patient satisfaction studies, the self-selection of patients writing reviews on public websites introduces bias and may limit the generalizability of our findings. Of note, a different subset of patients are likely to complete Internet reviews than those that complete traditional patient satisfaction surveys [19,20]. Therefore, our findings may capture a novel patient perspective. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Continuity of patient care is one of the cornerstones of primary care. To examine publicly available, Internet-based reviews of adult primary care physicians, specifically written by patients who report long-term relationships with their physicians. This substudy was nested within a larger qualitative content analysis of online physician ratings. We focused on reviews reflecting an established patient-physician relationship, that is, those seeing their physicians for at least 1 year. Of the 712 Internet reviews of primary care physicians, 93 reviews (13.1%) were from patients that self-identified as having a long-term relationship with their physician, 11 reviews (1.5%) commented on a first-time visit to a physician, and the remainder of reviews (85.4%) did not specify the amount of time with their physician. Analysis revealed six overarching domains: (1) personality traits or descriptors of the physician, (2) technical competence, (3) communication, (4) access to physician, (5) office staff/environment, and (6) coordination of care. Our analysis shows that patients who have been with their physician for at least 1 year write positive reviews on public websites and focus on physician attributes.
    Journal of Medical Internet Research 07/2013; 15(7):e131. DOI:10.2196/jmir.2552 · 3.43 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "To measure patients' perceptions about patient-doctor communication, we used 2 standardized instruments. The Ambulatory Care Experiences Survey (ACES) was developed to survey patients about their experiences with health care providers, as a complement to existing health plan level strategies for assessing health care quality [8]. We used the 6-item ACES subscale assessing the quality of patient-provider interactions. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Providers and policymakers are pursuing strategies to increase patient engagement in health care. Increasingly, online sections of medical records are viewable by patients though seldom are clinicians' visit notes included. We designed a one-year multi-site trial of online patient accessible office visit notes, OpenNotes. We hypothesized that patients and primary care physicians (PCPs) would want it to continue and that OpenNotes would not lead to significant disruptions to doctors' practices. Using a mixed methods approach, we designed a quasi-experimental study in 3 diverse healthcare systems in Boston, Pennsylvania, and Seattle. Two sites had existing patient internet portals; the third used an experimental portal. We targeted 3 key areas where we hypothesized the greatest impacts: beliefs and attitudes about OpenNotes, use of the patient internet portals, and patient-doctor communication. PCPs in the 3 sites were invited to participate in the intervention. Patients who were registered portal users of participating PCPs were given access to their PCPs' visit notes for one year. PCPs who declined participation in the intervention and their patients served as the comparison groups for the study. We applied the RE-AIM framework to our design in order to capture as comprehensive a picture as possible of the impact of OpenNotes. We developed pre- and post-intervention surveys for online administration addressing attitudes and experiences based on interviews and focus groups with patients and doctors. In addition, we tracked use of the internet portals before and during the intervention. PCP participation varied from 19% to 87% across the 3 sites; a total of 114 PCPs enrolled in the intervention with their 22,000 patients who were registered portal users. Approximately 40% of intervention and non-intervention patients at the 3 sites responded to the online survey, yielding a total of approximately 38,000 patient surveys. Many primary care physicians were willing to participate in this "real world" experiment testing the impact of OpenNotes on their patients and their practices. Results from this trial will inform providers, policy makers, and patients who contemplate such changes at a time of exploding interest in transparency, patient safety, and improving the quality of care.
    BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 04/2012; 12(1):32. DOI:10.1186/1472-6947-12-32 · 1.83 Impact Factor
Show more