The Dimension of the Press Ganey Survey Most Important in Evaluating Patient Satisfaction in the Academic Outpatient Orthopedic Surgery Setting

Abstract

Many studies have examined modifiable and nonmodifiable patient factors influencing patient satisfaction scores. The objective of this study was to evaluate which of the 6 domains making up the Press Ganey Survey had a greater magnitude of relative importance in the expected relationship with patient satisfaction in outpatient orthopedic surgery encounters. Press Ganey Survey satisfaction scores from 4737 clinical encounters from adult reconstructive surgery, sports medicine, hand, foot and ankle, trauma, and general orthopedic clinics at a single academic center from November 2010 to May 2017 were reviewed. Multiple patient factors, modifiable and nonmodifiable, were recorded. The Press Ganey Survey was divided into 6 domains to evaluate the relative importance of each to total patient satisfaction. The standardized parameter estimates from the multiple linear regression revealed that of the 6 domains making up the Press Ganey Survey, care provider had the greatest magnitude of relative importance in the expected relationship with total patient satisfaction (ß=0.53972). Approximately 80% of the variance in total patient satisfaction was accounted for by the care provider. The relative importance of the remaining 5 domains was as follows: access (ß=0.23483), personal issues (ß=0.16796), moving through the visit (ß=0.16795), nurse/assistant (ß=0.10010), and special services/valet (ß=0.06302). A principal components analysis suggested a 6-factor solution for the Press Ganey total satisfaction scale; care provider was the most dominant factor, and valet parking services was the least. The care provider had the most influence on the patient's overall satisfaction. Altogether, access, personal issues, moving through the visit, nurse/assistant, and special services/valet accounted for only approximately 20% of the total variance in patient satisfaction. This knowledge can be used by providers in the current health care climate, where patient consumerism is developing into the driver of care. This could allow resources to be focused on areas of influence, yielding a greater impact on patient satisfaction scores. [ Orthopedics . 2019; 42(4):198–204.]

Utilizing Oral Surveys to Better Understand Patient Satisfaction in a Low-Income, Urban Surgical Clinic

“…In accordance with prior research, 1,3 this study demonstrated that physician experience, hospital experience, and health outlook were all important themes in determining patient satisfaction while attempting to address how these themes are altered in a low-income urban surgical environment.…”

“…2 Research has identified several factors important in determining patient satisfaction include interaction with the physician, likeability of the medical staff, personal ideas, and access to care. 1,3 However, little information is available regarding how these factors are different for clinicians practicing in low-resource, largely minority surgical environments.…”

“…5 Structural inequities caused by the environment may also make it difficult for physicians to provide satisfactory care to all patients leading to a cycle of chronic illness. 6,7 It is thus important to recognize that although previous studies have identified 20% of patient satisfaction as determined by care accessibility and availability, 3 these features of health care may be naturally less satisfactory in urban environments due to the environment itself.…”

Preoperative Factors Associated with Press Ganey Patient Satisfaction Scores after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

“…Much of the PGAS score variability remains outside of the control of the surgeon, despite one report that the physician score is the most influential for the total PG score in orthopaedic clinic patients. 5 Such differences may be related to patient expectations in the clinic versus the surgical center, as patients are concerned with wait times and the time spent with the physician in the clinic setting. 8,19 There are several limitations to this study.…”

“…4 PG satisfactions scores have been investigated in prior orthopaedic literature, but those studies have been limited to outpatient clinic or inpatient encounters for total joint arthroplasty, spine, and hand surgeries. [1][2][3][5][6][7][8] The only studies evaluating PG scores in patients undergoing knee surgery have been in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. 1,7,9 These studies have shown poor correlations between legacy outcome measures and PG scores, questioning the utility of such patient satisfaction metrics.…”