The association between patient experience and healthcare outcomes using SEER-CAHPS patient experience and outcomes among cancer survivors

Mohan, Charan; Rotter, Jason; Tan, Hung‐Jui; Kent, Erin E.; Bjurlin, Marc A.; Basch, Ethan; Samuel, Cleo A.; Nielsen, Matthew E.; Smith, Angela

doi:10.1016/j.jgo.2020.11.006

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, however, it is unclear if even validated patient experience surveys are actually associated with quality. Although a few studies have found some linkages (Anhang-Price et al, 2014), recent rigorous research has found no associations between HCAHPS surveys and clinical outcomes (Mohan et al, 2020; Schmocker et al, 2019). Thus, although there are consistent associations between OPRs and patient experience surveys, it is unclear how these measures actually affect clinical and organizational outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Online Patient Reviews Associated With Health Care Outcomes? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Placona

Rathert

2021

Med Care Res Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although online patient reviews (OPRs) are ubiquitous, there has been debate about whether OPRs are associated with measures of health care outcomes. The majority of patients search for online information about a hospital or provider before scheduling an encounter, therefore, the extent to which OPRs are valid information is important. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to examine the extent to which OPRs are associated with measures of patient experience, clinical quality, and other outcomes. We searched Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PsycInfo, which yielded 32 studies. There were consistent positive correlations between OPRs and patient experience at both the organization and individual provider levels of analysis. However, associations between OPRs and quality measures were mixed. Organizational level OPRs may be more reliable than individual provider OPRs. In addition, the strength of association could be affected by the type of encounter setting, specialty, and specific measures.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Online Patient Reviews Associated With Health Care Outcomes? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Placona

Rathert

2021

Med Care Res Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As composite scores tend to cluster at the upper end of the rating scales, to use composite scores as main independent variables in our study, we categorized scores $90 as "excellent" and scores ,90 as "less than excellent," as previous work has done. [26][27][28] Receipt of GCT GCT for CRC was defined following NCCN stage-specific guidelines for the treatment of colon and rectal cancer. 29,30 We aimed to determine the receipt of standard patterns of treatment within general stage groupings (stage I, II, or III) for colon and rectal cancer, including care received from the time of surgical resection (as the most important component of curative treatment of CRC) to receipt of adjuvant therapy or cancer surveillance (dependent on general stage group).…”

Section: Cahps Patient Experiences With Carementioning

confidence: 99%

Associations Between Patient Experience With Care, Race and Ethnicity, and Receipt of CRC Treatment Among SEER-CAHPS Patients With Multiple Comorbidities

Navarro,

Tsui,

Barzi

et al. 2024

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and multiple comorbidities are less likely to receive guideline-concordant treatment (GCT), a disparity exacerbated by racial and ethnic disparities in GCT. Yet, positive patient experiences with care are associated with more appropriate care use. We investigated associations between patient experiences with care, race and ethnicity, and receipt of GCT for CRC among older adults with multiple comorbidities. Methods: We used SEER-Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) data to identify participants diagnosed with CRC from 2001 to 2017 at age ≥67 years with additional chronic conditions. Stage-specific GCT was identified following recommendations in the NCCN Guidelines for Colon and Rectal Cancer. Patient experiences with care were identified from CAHPS surveys. Multivariable log-binomial regression estimated associations between race and ethnicity and receipt of GCT by experiences with care. Results: A total of 2,612 patients were included. Those reporting excellent experience with getting care quickly were 5% more likely to receive GCT than those reporting less-than-excellent experience (relative risk [RR], 1.05; 95% CI, 1.04–1.05). When reporting less-than-excellent experience with getting care quickly, non-Hispanic Black (NHB) patients were less likely than non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients to receive GCT (RR, 0.80; 99.38% CI, 0.78–0.82), yet NHB patients were more likely to receive GCT than NHW patients when reporting excellent experience (RR, 1.05; 99.38% CI, 1.02–1.09). When reporting less-than-excellent experience with getting needed care, Hispanic patients were less likely than NHW patients to receive GCT (RR, 0.91; 99.38% CI, 0.88–0.94), yet Hispanic patients were more likely to receive GCT than NHW patients when reporting excellent experience (RR, 1.06; 99.38% CI, 1.03–1.08). Conclusions: Although excellent patient experience among those with multiple comorbidities may not be strongly associated with receipt of GCT for CRC overall, improvements in experiences of accessing care among NHB and Hispanic patients with CRC and additional comorbidities may aid in mitigating racial and ethnic disparities in receipt of GCT.

show abstract

“…However, it should be noted that highly rated patient experience, as measured by CAHPS, may not be associated with improved health outcomes. 21,22 This may simply be related to the idea that PREs are distinct but complementary to PROs and traditional clinical outcomes.…”

Section: Differentiating Patient-reported Outcomes From Other Patient...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Surgical Quality

Hyland

Pusic

Liu

2023

Clin Colon Rectal Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Delivering high-quality surgical care requires knowing how best to define and measure quality in surgery. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) enable surgeons, health care systems, and payers to understand meaningful health outcomes from the patient's perspective and can be measured using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). As a result, there is much interest in using PROMs in routine surgical care, to guide quality improvement and to inform reimbursement pay structures. This chapter defines PROs and PROMs, differentiates PROMs from other quality measures such as patient-reported experience measures, describes PROMs in the context of routine clinical care, and provides an overview of interpreting PROM data. This chapter also describes how PROMs may be applied to quality improvement and value-based reimbursement in surgery.

show abstract

The association between patient experience and healthcare outcomes using SEER-CAHPS patient experience and outcomes among cancer survivors

Cited by 9 publications

References 37 publications

Are Online Patient Reviews Associated With Health Care Outcomes? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Are Online Patient Reviews Associated With Health Care Outcomes? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Associations Between Patient Experience With Care, Race and Ethnicity, and Receipt of CRC Treatment Among SEER-CAHPS Patients With Multiple Comorbidities

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Surgical Quality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About