• Medical care · Mar 2001

    Improving the assessment of (in)patients' satisfaction with hospital care.

    • A A Hendriks, M R Vrielink, E M Smets, S Q van Es, and J C De Haes.
    • Department of Medical Psychology, Academic Medical Center/University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. a.a.j.hendriks@amc.uva.nl
    • Med Care. 2001 Mar 1;39(3):270-83.

    BackgroundA self-report questionnaire is the most widely used method to assess (in)patients' satisfaction with (hospital) care. However, problems like nonresponse, missing values, and skewed score distributions may threaten the representativeness, validity, and reliability of results. We investigated which of alternative item-response formats maximizes desired outcomes.DesignFive formats were compared on the basis of sample characteristics, psychometric properties at the scale and item levels, and patients' opinions of the questionnaire.SubjectsConsecutively discharged patients (n=784) were sampled, of which a representative (sex, age, length of hospital stay) subsample of 514 (65%) responded.MeasuresA 54-item satisfaction questionnaire addressing 12 aspects of care was used. Patients responded using either a 10-step evaluation scale ranging from "very poor" to "excellent" (E10), a 5-step evaluation scale ranging from "poor" to "excellent" (E5), or a 5-step satisfaction scale ranging from "dissatisfied" to "very satisfied" (S5). The 5-step scales were administered with response options presented as either boxed scale steps to be marked or words to be circled.ResultsE5 scales yielded lower means than S5 scales. However, at the item level, the S5 scale showed better construct validity, more variability, and less peaked score distributions. Circling words yielded fewer missing item scores than marking boxes. The E5 scale showed more desirable score distributions than the E10 scale, but construct validity and reliability were lower.ConclusionsNo large differences among formats were found. However, if individual items are important carriers of information, a (5-step) satisfaction response scale, with response options presented in words next to each item, appears to be the optimal format.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…