A Systematic Review of Strategies to Enhance Response Rates and Representativeness of Patient Experience Surveys

Abstract

Background: Data from surveys of patient care experiences are a cornerstone of public reporting and pay-for-performance initiatives. Recently, increasing concerns have been raised about survey response rates and how to promote equity by ensuring that responses represent the perspectives of all patients. Objective: Review evidence on survey administration strategies to improve response rates and representativeness of patient surveys. Research Design: Systematic review adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Study Selection: Forty peer-reviewed randomized experiments of administration protocols for patient experience surveys. Results: Mail administration with telephone follow-up provides a median response rate benefit of 13% compared with mail-only or telephone-only. While surveys administered only by web typically result in lower response rates than those administered by mail or telephone (median difference in response rate: −21%, range: −44%, 0%), the limited evidence for a sequential web-mail-telephone mode suggests a potential response rate benefit over sequential mail-telephone (median: 4%, range: 2%, 5%). Telephone-only and sequential mixed modes including telephone may yield better representation across patient subgroups by age, insurance type, and race/ethnicity. Monetary incentives are associated with large increases in response rates (median increase: 12%, range: 7%, 20%). Conclusions: Sequential mixed-mode administration yields higher patient survey response rates than a single mode. Including telephone in sequential mixed-mode administration improves response among those with historically lower response rates; including web in mixed-mode administration may increase response at lower cost. Other promising strategies to improve response rates include in-person survey administration during hospital discharge, incentives, minimizing survey language complexity, and prenotification before survey administration.

Reliability and validity of the Patient Experiences Questionnaire for Interdisciplinary Treatment for Substance Dependence – Continuous Electronic Measurement (PEQ-ITSD – CEM)

“…This study applied both CTT and IRT methods to evaluate survey items, and the results provided useful and different insights into the performance of the PEQ-ITSD -CEM instrument. However, data collection strategies that focus solely on reducing burden may result in the loss of important information and reduced representativeness of patient survey responses [27].…”

Spanish mental health residents' perspectives about residency education on the genetics of psychiatric disorders: A cross‐sectional survey

“…Despite not having a high percentage of participation, we must emphasize that the result was similar to other web-based surveys. 29,30 Second, we cannot rule out a bias in sample participation.…”

An observer tool to enhance learning of incoming anesthesia residents’ skills during simulation training of central venous catheter insertion: a randomized controlled trial

“…We anticipated limited protocol compliance and therefore offered a well-known anesthesia book as incentive to complete the whole study. Offering a material or financial incentive is a well-known factor that can increase recruitment [ 29 ], complete participation in a program [ 30 ] or questionnaire response rate [ 31 ]. Unfortunately, this did not lead to full resident participation.…”