The Nordic Patient Experiences Questionnaire (NORPEQ): cross-national comparison of data quality, internal consistency and validity in four Nordic countries

Skudal, Kjersti Eeg; Garratt, Andrew; Eriksson, Birgitta; Leinonen, Tuija; Simonsen, Jan Henrik; Bjertnæs, Øyvind Andresen

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-000864

Cited by 43 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Patient responses to experience surveys are frequently dominated by the most positive response option. [29][30][31][32] However, research using qualitative approaches indicates that experiences may in fact be poorer than those suggested through literal interpretation of the labels of quantitative surveys. 8 9 Patients may be reluctant to criticise care using survey instruments, a phenomenon that has previously been reported in users of mental health services, and in patients undergoing elective orthopaedic surgery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the meaning of ‘good’ or ‘very good’ patient evaluations of care in English general practice: a mixed methods study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo examine concordance between responses to patient experience survey items evaluating doctors' interpersonal skills, and subsequent patient interview accounts of their experiences of care.DesignMixed methods study integrating data from patient questionnaires completed immediately after a video-recorded face-to-face consultation with a general practitioner (GP) and subsequent interviews with the same patients which included playback of the recording.Setting12 general practices in rural, urban and inner city locations in six areas in England.Participants50 patients (66% female, aged 19–96 years) consulting face-to-face with 32 participating GPs.Main outcome measuresPositive responses to interpersonal skills items in a postconsultation questionnaire (‘good’ and ‘very good’) were compared with experiences reported during subsequent video elicitation interview (categorised as positive, negative or neutral by independent clinical raters) when reviewing that aspect of care.ResultsWe extracted 230 textual statements from 50 interview transcripts which related to the evaluation of GPs' interpersonal skills. Raters classified 70.9% (n=163) of these statements as positive, 19.6% (n=45) neutral and 9.6% (n=22) negative. Comments made by individual patients during interviews did not always express the same sentiment as their responses to the questionnaire. Where questionnaire responses indicated that interpersonal skills were ‘very good’, 84.6% of interview statements concerning that item were classified as positive. However, where patients rated interpersonal skills as ‘good’, only 41.9% of interview statements were classified as positive, and 18.9% as negative.ConclusionsPositive responses on patient experience questionnaires can mask important negative experiences which patients describe in subsequent interviews. The interpretation of absolute patient experience scores in feedback and public reporting should be done with caution, and clinicians should not be complacent following receipt of ‘good’ feedback. Relative scores are more easily interpretable when used to compare the performance of providers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the meaning of ‘good’ or ‘very good’ patient evaluations of care in English general practice: a mixed methods study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The study by Skudal et al in four Nordic countries showed that the least patient satisfaction was related to administrative and financial units and the highest satisfaction was from public and welfare services. Also determining factors for dissatisfaction and attempt to solve them and identify and correct some hospital processes, especially the processes of acceptance and discharge are among cases that in addition to making it possible to provide services with higher quality, leads to patient satisfaction [15]. Riiskjaer et al in a study in 2012 observed strong positive correlation between the index of hospital environment and patient satisfaction.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Evaluation of Patient Satisfaction and Factors Affecting It: A Review of the Literature

Farzianpour¹,

Byravan²,

Amirian³

2015

Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient satisfaction with hospital services is one of the most important indicators of effectiveness and quality of hospital services. Patient satisfaction surveys can provide valuable data for evaluating the current status, awareness of quality and quantity of process improvement programs and quality improvement to health managers and policy makers. The present study discusses previous studies conducted in this area, and presents recommendations to improve patient satisfaction. The method of this study is review. Selected papers were identified by searching keyword in Persian and English in different databases and after applying the inclusion criteria, 19 studies were extracted and analyzed. 23,793 patients in 12 studies entered into this research were investigated. Generally, satisfaction of the patients in this study was estimated at an average level. Continuous evaluation of patient satisfaction and identification of the factors affecting it requires establishment of comprehensive and accurate data system in this area; that by application of the results of previous studies steps can be taken to improve patient satisfaction. Patients' satisfaction in Iran, compared with other countries, is desirable. In addition, the overall satisfaction of patients in recent years has increased compared to previous years and the reason can be measures like different ways of improving the quality, customer orientation, and applying the results of research conducted in this area.

show abstract

“…Through face-to-face meetings, the contents of some questionnaires used in previous surveys in English-speaking countries and in Italy were reviewed, including provision of information on the visit and treatment course, humanization of care, outpatient involvement in decision making, perception of competence, management of continuity of care, privacy, and overall satisfaction. In particular, the following multidimensional and unidimensional questionnaires were examined: the Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire35 developed by Gasquet et al,22 the Nordic Patient Experience Questionnaire,25 and the questionnaire developed by Oltedal et al24 for foreign contexts: the Quality Perception Questionnaire31 and the Verona Satisfaction Scale27 for the Italian context. In addition, some reviews and papers on theoretical models of patient-centeredness were examined 1–6…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Services OutPatient Experience questionnaire: factorial validity and reliability of a patient-centered outcome measure for outpatient settings in Italy

Coluccia¹,

Ferretti²,

Pozza³

2014

PROM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe patient-centered approach to health care does not seem to be sufficiently developed in the Italian context, and is still characterized by the biomedical model. In addition, there is a lack of validated outcome measures to assess outpatient experience as an aspect common to a variety of settings. The current study aimed to evaluate the factorial validity, reliability, and invariance across sex of the Health Services OutPatient Experience (HSOPE) questionnaire, a short ten-item measure of patient-centeredness for Italian adult outpatients. The rationale for unidimensionality of the measure was that it could cover global patient experience as a process common to patients with a variety of diseases and irrespective of the phase of treatment course.Patients and methodsThe HSOPE was compiled by 1,532 adult outpatients (51% females, mean age 59.22 years, standard deviation 16.26) receiving care in ten facilities at the Santa Maria alle Scotte University Hospital of Siena, Italy. The sample represented all the age cohorts. Twelve percent were young adults, 57% were adults, and 32% were older adults. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to evaluate factor structure. Reliability was evaluated as internal consistency using Cronbach’s α. Factor invariance was assessed through multigroup analyses.ResultsBoth exploratory and confirmatory analyses suggested a clearly defined unidimensional structure of the measure, with all the ten items having salient loadings on a single factor. Internal consistency was excellent (α=0.95). Indices of model fit supported a single-factor structure for both male and female outpatient groups. Young adult outpatients had significantly lower scores on perceived patient-centeredness relative to older adults. No significant difference emerged on patient-centeredness between male and female outpatients.ConclusionThe HSOPE questionnaire seemed to be a tool with high acceptability and excellent psychometric properties to measure patient-centeredness as a unidimensional construct. Limitations and implications for future research are discussed.

show abstract

The Nordic Patient Experiences Questionnaire (NORPEQ): cross-national comparison of data quality, internal consistency and validity in four Nordic countries

Cited by 43 publications

References 37 publications

Investigating the meaning of ‘good’ or ‘very good’ patient evaluations of care in English general practice: a mixed methods study

Investigating the meaning of ‘good’ or ‘very good’ patient evaluations of care in English general practice: a mixed methods study

Evaluation of Patient Satisfaction and Factors Affecting It: A Review of the Literature

Health Services OutPatient Experience questionnaire: factorial validity and reliability of a patient-centered outcome measure for outpatient settings in Italy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About