Improving patient experience in primary care: a multimethod programme of research on the measurement and improvement of patient experience

Background: There has been an increased focus towards improving quality of care within the NHS in the last 15 years; as part of this, there has been an emphasis on the importance of patient feedback within policy, through National Service Frameworks and the Quality and Outcomes Framework. The develo...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Programme grants for applied research 2017-04, Vol.5 (9), p.1-452
Hauptverfasser: Burt, Jenni, Campbell, John, Abel, Gary, Aboulghate, Ahmed, Ahmed, Faraz, Asprey, Anthea, Barry, Heather, Beckwith, Julia, Benson, John, Boiko, Olga, Bower, Pete, Calitri, Raff, Carter, Mary, Davey, Antoinette, Elliott, Marc N, Elmore, Natasha, Farrington, Conor, Haque, Hena Wali, Henley, William, Lattimer, Val, Llanwarne, Nadia, Lloyd, Cathy, Lyratzopoulos, Georgios, Maramba, Inocencio, Mounce, Luke, Newbould, Jenny, Paddison, Charlotte, Parker, Richard, Richards, Suzanne, Roberts, Martin, Setodji, Claude, Silverman, Jonathan, Warren, Fiona, Wilson, Ed, Wright, Christine, Roland, Martin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background: There has been an increased focus towards improving quality of care within the NHS in the last 15 years; as part of this, there has been an emphasis on the importance of patient feedback within policy, through National Service Frameworks and the Quality and Outcomes Framework. The development and administration of large-scale national patient surveys to gather representative data on patient experience, such as the national GP Patient Survey in primary care, has been one such initiative. However, it remains unclear how the survey is used by patients and what impact the data may have on practice. Objectives: Our research aimed to gain insight into how different patients use surveys to record experiences of general practice; how primary care staff respond to feedback; and how to engage primary care staff in responding to feedback. Methods: We used methods including quantitative survey analyses, focus groups, interviews, an exploratory trial and an experimental vignette study. Results: (1) Understanding patient experience data. Patients readily criticised their care when reviewing consultations on video, although they were reluctant to be critical when completing questionnaires. When trained raters judged communication during a consultation to be poor, a substantial proportion of patients rated the doctor as ‘good’ or ‘very good’. Absolute scores on questionnaire surveys should be treated with caution; they may present an overoptimistic view of general practitioner (GP) care. However, relative rankings to identify GPs who are better or poorer at communicating may be acceptable, as long as statistically reliable figures are obtained. Most patients have a particular GP whom they prefer to see; however, up to 40% of people who have such a preference are unable regularly to see the doctor of their choice. Users of out-of-hours care reported worse experiences when the service was run by a commercial provider than when it was run by a not-for profit or NHS provider. (2) Understanding patient experience in minority ethnic groups. Asian respondents to the GP Patient Survey tend to be registered with practices with generally low scores, explaining about half of the difference in the poorer reported experiences of South Asian patients than white British patients. We found no evidence that South Asian patients used response scales differently. When viewing the same consultation in an experimental vignette study, South Asian respondents gave higher scores than
ISSN:2050-4322
2050-4330
DOI:10.3310/pgfar05090