A Delphi Method Analysis to Create an Emergency Medicine Educational Patient Satisfaction Survey

Abstract

IntroductionFeedback on patient satisfaction (PS) as a means to monitor and improve performance in patient communication is lacking in residency training. A physician’s promotion, compensation and job satisfaction may be impacted by his individual PS scores, once he is in practice. Many communication and satisfaction surveys exist but none focus on the emergency department setting for educational purposes. The goal of this project was to create an emergency medicine-based educational PS survey with strong evidence for content validity.MethodsWe used the Delphi Method (DM) to obtain expert opinion via an iterative process of surveying. Questions were mined from four PS surveys as well as from group suggestion. The DM analysis determined the structure, content and appropriate use of the tool. The group used four-point Likert-type scales and Lynn’s criteria for content validity to determine relevant questions from the stated goals.ResultsTwelve recruited experts participated in a series of seven surveys to achieve consensus. A 10-question, single-page survey with an additional page of qualitative questions and demographic questions was selected. Thirty one questions were judged to be relevant from an original 48-question list. Of these, the final 10 questions were chosen. Response rates for individual survey items was 99.5%.ConclusionThe DM produced a consensus survey with content validity evidence. Future work will be needed to obtain evidence for response process, internal structure and construct validity.

The Development of Best Practice Recommendations to Support the Hiring, Recruitment, and Advancement of Women Physicians in Emergency Medicine

“…Stakeholder feedback was collated and reviewed by the working group. A priori, we decided to retain recommendations that were endorsed by at least 80% of the stakeholder group, a cutoff that has been used in prior consensus work and in guidelines for obtaining expert consensus . Our logic was that adoption of a recommendation was unlikely to happen without strong acceptability of its importance and that our goal for the first round of recommendations was to identify items that were of highest priority for implementation.…”

Development and validation of the Nurse’s Workplace Mental Health Questionnaire

“…Other studies have tended to include 20–30 experts [ 38 ], because a larger number of experts may elicit a different set of questions that are worth examining. However, there is also some evidence that a larger sample of experts may not lead to further response diversity [ 39 ]. Finally, to maintain the participant’s attention, we did not mix negative and positive question wording, which may have increased the probability that participants completed invalid questionnaires.…”

Oral health curriculum evaluation tool (OHCET) for primary care training programs

“…We identified a Delphi group 31–33 to help develop our tool. This expert nationwide panel included 12 individuals representing 12 primary care disciplines (Medical and DO Schools, Family Medicine, Internal Medicine, OB/Gyn and Pediatric/Med‐Peds Residencies, Geriatric Fellowships, PA training programs, and Nurse Practitioner and Midwifery training programs).…”