Patient Experience in Primary Care: A Systematic Review of CG-CAHPS Surveys

Abstract

The National Academy of Medicine’s (NAM) vision for 21st-century health care underscored the need for increased patient engagement and charged health-care researchers to develop tools to evaluate patient experience. The most widely studied patient experience tools are the Consumer Assessments of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) surveys. The Clinician and Group (CG)-CAHPS survey is the preferred patient experience survey for primary care, and thus a systematic review of patient reports from the CG-CAHPS empirical literature is ideal to appreciate the voice of health-care consumers. This systematic review revealed patient subjective reports regarding the acceptability of health-care delivery models, the effectiveness of interventions, the timeliness of care in different practice climates, and their responses to quality improvement initiatives. The synthesized results inform clinicians, organizations, and the health-care system where to prioritize and how to adapt services to efficiently provide equitable care, achieving the NAM’s vision for a patient-centered US health-care system.

Factors Associated With Patient Ratings of Timeliness of Primary Care Appointments

“…It is also of interest that no differences were observed between male or female patients for this area, contrary to another study showing female patients VA providing lower ratings on communication, trust, and care quality (18). Increasing age had a strong effect on higher ratings of access, a finding noted in many studies of patient experience, including primary care (19)(20)(21). Some research has shown that patient expectations and preference change with age.…”

The Correlation of Communication Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction

“…The questions regarding communication effectiveness in the Clinician & Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems questionnaire and other questionnaires addressing communication effectiveness are subject to strong ceiling effects (7,8). And they are in some ways too general to lead to direct coaching and training of specific tactics (5,6).…”

Patients’ Experiences of Interprofessional Collaborative Practice in Primary Care: A Scoping Review of the Literature

“…In response to this need, CG-CAHPS released a qualitative Patient Elicitation Protocol for the purpose of gathering narrative descriptions from patients about their health care ( 17 ). Thus, while patients’ perspectives on primary care have begun to be explored ( 18 ), the authors could find no published reviews of interprofessional collaboration in primary care (IPC-pc) involving patients’ experiences. The risks, benefits, and outcomes of IPC-pc remain relatively unexplored, from the perspective of patients utilizing this model of care, who are arguably its greatest stakeholders.…”