Patient Assessments of the Most Important Medical Decision During a Hospitalization (original) (raw)
Related papers
Inpatients' Ratings of Care in 5 Common Clinical Conditions
OBJECTIVE: Using the dimensions of patient-centered care defined by the Institute of Medicine, this study examined patient satisfaction within 5 clinical conditions. METHOD: Items from the Press Ganey Inpatient Questionnaire were mapped onto the Institute of Medicine dimensions of patient-centered care. A standardized mail-out/mail-back methodology was used to collect data from random samples of patients within 5 days of discharge. SAMPLE: Patients hospitalized for heart attack, heart failure, stroke, pneumonia, or childbirth were included in the study. The sample contained 10,000 patients at 210 hospitals. RESULTS: Patients hospitalized for different clinical conditions expressed different levels of satisfaction. There may be different care needs, expectations, and evaluations of care based on these clinical conditions. However, it is probable that an all-encompassing patient-centered focus would improve care for all of these groups. CONCLUSIONS: Quality improvement professionals should attend to 2 Institute of Medicine dimensions: (1) respect for patient's values, preferences, and expressed needs and (2) emotional support, relieving fear and anxiety. It is in these areas that improved performance will be associated with the greatest increases in patient satisfaction. Four specific issues were identified as quality improvement priorities, regardless of condition: response to complaints; sensitivity to the inconvenience of hospitalization; including patients in decision making; addressing emotional and spiritual needs.
Inpatientsʼ Ratings of Care in 5 Common Clinical Conditions
Quality Management in Health Care, 2004
Using the dimensions of patient-centered care defined by the Institute of Medicine, this study examined patient satisfaction within 5 clinical conditions. Method: Items from the Press Ganey Inpatient Questionnaire were mapped onto the Institute of Medicine dimensions of patient-centered care. A standardized mail-out/mail-back methodology was used to collect data from random samples of patients within 5 days of discharge. Sample: Patients hospitalized for heart attack, heart failure, stroke, pneumonia, or childbirth were included in the study. The sample contained 10,000 patients at 210 hospitals. Results: Patients hospitalized for different clinical conditions expressed different levels of satisfaction. There may be different care needs, expectations, and evaluations of care based on these clinical conditions. However, it is probable that an all-encompassing patient-centered focus would improve care for all of these groups. Conclusions: Quality improvement professionals should attend to 2 Institute of Medicine dimensions: (1) respect for patient's values, preferences, and expressed needs and (2) emotional support, relieving fear and anxiety. It is in these areas that improved performance will be associated with the greatest increases in patient satisfaction. Four specific issues were identified as quality improvement priorities, regardless of condition: response to complaints; sensitivity to the inconvenience of hospitalization; including patients in decision making; addressing emotional and spiritual needs.
Patients' perceptions of the meaning of good care in surgical care: a grounded theory study Abstract Background Patients in surgical care have reported a fear of being discharged prior to sufficient recovery and a lack of control of their situation. Establishing the patient-nurse relationship is essential in the context of the care. The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare has established indicators for good care for comparison, evaluation and improvement of the quality of the health care system. These indicators are knowledge-based, appropriate, safe, effective and equal health care, as well as care within a reasonable time and patient-centred care. Current core competence in nursing education include quality improvement, patient-centred care, teamwork and collaboration, using evidence-based practice, safety and informatics. This study investigates patients' perceptions of the meaning of good care in inpatient surgical care.
Inpatients’ opinions on a hospital in Portugal
F1000Research, 2013
Little is known about the relationship between the opinions of Background: inpatients and the degree to which hospitals are improving in performance over time. The aim of this study was to determine the personal assessment level of inpatients or their representatives regarding aspects of health care in an internal medicine ward. We carried out a questionnaire in September 2011 with 284 Methods: discharged patients and patient representatives, focusing on their opinions about the department, health professionals and amenities, with response options ranging from 1 (very bad) to 5 (very good). The relationships between domains from the questionnaire and socio-demographic factors were examined using a t-test and one-way ANOVA. The response rate was 78%. The patients showed a slightly Results: higher mean score (m) for factors in the medical care domain than did the patient representatives (m = 4.51 vs. m = 4.27; p = 0.014). The mean score of all the items in all domains was 4.24; this allowed us to determine the difference from the overall mean (DIFM) for medical care (DIFM = 0.18; p = 0.000), foods (DIFM =-0.31; p = 0.000), diagnostic tests (DIFM =-0.15; p = 0.036) and transport (DIFM =-0.41; p = 0.000). Respondents with a medium or higher educational level gave lower scores to the domains food (m = 3.74; p = 0.004), diagnostic tests (m = 3.72; p = 0.04) and transport (m = 3.62; p = 0.025) than those with lower educational levels. The domains facilities (m = 2.4; p = 0.04) and diagnostic tests (m = 3.63; p = 0.009) were given lower scores by those aged <50 years compared with older respondents. Our findings suggest that the evaluation of the responders Conclusions: will allow the hospital management to make improvements in the quality of care.
Background In Austria several regulations were published in order to support initiatives to increase patient safety. Since then, many patient safety projects were implemented in Austrian hospitals; therefore, it was the aim of the current survey to examine the perceptions of Austrian citizens with respect to topics relevant to patient safety. Methods Between 8 and 22 October 2015 a qualitative cross-sectional telephone interview study was performed. A sample of citizens above 14 years of age was randomly drawn. The survey contained 6 questions. In each of the nine states of Austria, a representative number of citizens were interviewed. Results In total 1021(female: 52.3%) telephone interviews were performed and 249 (24.7%) citizens stated that trust/confidence in patient safety is very high, 571 (55.9%) assessed the reputation of a hospital as very important and 739 (72.4%) stated that a detailed explanation of the treatment as well as information on associated risk factors and possibilities of further treatments is very important. Of the respondents 722 (70.7%) stated that patient safety measures in a given hospital are very important, 807 (79.0%) stated that it is important to be informed about patient safety measures and 547 (53.6%) stated that if something did not satisfactorily function they would complain to the hospital. Significant differences occurred for states with and without university hospitals. Conclusion The results of the survey give cause for concern as the majority of interviewed citizens have medium or low trust/confidence in patient safety. Furthermore, more than two-thirds of Austrian citizens revealed that detailed explanation of treatment, information on associated risk factors, information about patient safety measures to predict medical errors and information about patient safety measures which are in place in a hospital are very important. The study showed that patient safety is an important topic for Austrian citizens and they want to be informed and involved. The study also indicated the need to promote patient safety aspects and to decrease the number of people who are not confident concerning patient safety in Austrian hospitals.
International Journal of Healthcare Management, 2016
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the appropriateness of hospitalized patients' level of care as assessed by their treating physicians. The study was conducted as a qualitative study, based on a questionnaire. The study suggests that physicians generally believe that patients who occupy in-hospital beds are cared for at the appropriate level of care. It is worth to note that a relatively large fraction of patients have had their medical needs attended to, but remain hospitalized while waiting for municipal action. Successful downsizing of in-hospital bed-capacity assumes that either a segment of patients who are inappropriately hospitalized exists and could be identified, or that viable alternatives to in-hospital care exist and are available. The results of the present study argue against the first statement. However, we have identified a segment of patients who experience an unnecessarily long in-patient length of stay due to waiting times for municipal action and other post-discharge follow-up measures. Alternatives to in-hospital care which deserve further attention are supporting services in the outpatient setting.
Factors Influencing Medical Decision- Making For Seriously Ill Patients In The Acute Care Hospital
Aim: To acquire a fuller understanding of the influences on decision-making in an acute care hospital for seriously ill patients. Background: From the moment of a diagnosis of serious, potentially life-limiting illness, patients and their families are faced with multiple, complex and significant decisions that will influence the entire illness trajectory, including their end-of-life care (EOLC). Compounding personal factors is the complexity of dying today with acute ward areas in tertiary hospitals use of technological interventions to prolong life, at all costs being the norm. If hospice care is initiated, in these areas, it is often at too late a stage to relieve distressing symptoms and to offer the person the best possible path of care for a dignified death. Design and methods: A retrospective cohort research design was used for this study. Results: Thirty nine (39) medical records that met the inclusion criteria were audited. While medical records are limited in terms of the quality of the information contained in them in terms of social, behavioural and other qualitative information, the audit obtained detailed clinical information on patient characteristics, clinical care, and family and clinician involvement in the care of these patients. Communication between health professionals and patient and or family were limited. Poor documentation in the medical record did not support shared decision-making with decisions to amend the care pathway to palliative not undertaken in most instances despite no improvement in response to care or deterioration in the patient's condition. Conclusion: Communication between health care professions, patients and their family's needs to be addressed. The management of patients who are seriously ill in acute ward areas should be altered to reflect the patient's condition. Nurses, using a person-centred approach, have a role in advocating for the patient and the family in times of stress. Discussions concerning end-of-life of seriously ill patients need to be open, transparent and communicated as these discussions are critical to ensuring the patient's wishes are realised.
Quality and Safety in Health Care, 2004
To compare the views of healthcare professionals and patients regarding compliance with standards of care concerning patient information. Design: Self-rated questionnaire survey. Setting: Nine wards in short stay French hospitals. Participants: 939 patients and 359 healthcare professionals (physicians, nurses, assistants and other professionals). Main outcome measure: Patients' and healthcare professionals' views of compliance with 20 standards of patient care described in the French accreditation manual. Comparison of the rank order of the standards within the two samples. Results: The response rate was 61.5% in the patient group and 85.8% in the healthcare professionals. The rank orders for the 20 items were similar in both groups (Spearman rank order correlation 0.6, p = 0.004). The two items ranked highest by healthcare professionals (''consent request for a surgical procedure'' and ''the doctors ask the visitors to leave the room before examining a patient'') were also the two ranked highest by the patients. Three items were ranked low by both groups: ''consent request for students to be present'', ''health education given to patients'', and ''possibility to express satisfaction during discharge''. Patients were more satisfied with their pain management than were healthcare providers. Professionals were more satisfied with the social services than the patients. Conclusion: There are both similarities and differences between patients' and healthcare professionals' views of care. Accurate assessments of quality performed during the accreditation procedure require that both patients' and professionals' views be taken into account.
Hospital patients' preferences for involvement in decision-making
Swiss Medical Weekly
Assessing patients' preferences for shared decision-making and receiving information. Design: Cross-sectional cohort study. Setting: University Hospital in Northwest Switzerland. Participants: 1825 in-patients (mean age: 58 years, 48.7% female) were asked to participate, 1040 patients responded (59%). Main outcome measures: Proportion of positive answers to two questions depicting typical elements of shared decision-making plus a question asking for patients' information needs. These questions were embedded in a questionnaire sent to patients two weeks after discharge from the hospital, asking for perceived deficits during their hospital stay and socio-demographic characteristics. Results: 779/947 (79.1%) agreed to the statement: "One should stick to the physician's advice even if one is not fully convinced of his ideas". 620/945 (65.6%) agreed to the statement: "It should completely be left to physicians to decide on a patient's treatment." 914/952 (96%) agreed to the statement: "Even when the news is bad the patient must be informed." Older patients and less educated patients are more likely to agree with the first two statements, patients with a non-Swiss cultural background favour the information needs statement slightly less than other patients (92.4 vs 96.7% agreement). The severity of illness had no influence on agreeing or not. However, patients who disagreed on any statement were more likely to report a lack of information from the hospital. Conclusions: A substantial number of patients in this study wanted the physician to take medical decisions. Yet, almost all patients wanted honest information about their health status. Health professionals have to find out to what extent an individual patient wants to be involved in decisionmaking.