Development and validation of a patient experience of care survey for emergency departments
Objectives To (1) develop a survey to assess the patient experience of care in hospital‐based emergency departments (ED) and (2) evaluate the reliability and validity of composite measures of patient experience using data collected through the experimental implementation of the newly developed Emerg...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Health services research 2022-02, Vol.57 (1), p.102-112 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 112 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 102 |
| container_title | Health services research |
| container_volume | 57 |
| creator | Ye, Feifei Parast, Layla Hays, Ron D. Elliott, Marc N. Becker, Kirsten Lehrman, William G. Stark, Debra Martino, Steven |
| description | Objectives
To (1) develop a survey to assess the patient experience of care in hospital‐based emergency departments (ED) and (2) evaluate the reliability and validity of composite measures of patient experience using data collected through the experimental implementation of the newly developed Emergency Department Patient Experience of Care (EDPEC) Discharged to Community (DTC) Survey.
Data Source
4893 adult patients were treated in the ED of 16 hospitals across the United States in 2018.
Study Design
The study utilized a cross‐sectional survey.
Data Collection
Survey development activities included a literature review, focus groups, and cognitive interviews with recently discharged ED patients, technical expert panels, and multiple field experiments. Survey development resulted in a 34‐item instrument; the analysis reported here focuses on 18 items on patient experience of care. Using data from the EDPEC DTC Survey in the 2018 Feasibility Test, we performed confirmatory factor analysis to group 15 evaluative survey items into composite measures. We examined internal consistency reliability, interunit reliability, and associations between each composite measure and patients' overall rating and willingness to recommend the ED.
Principal Findings
Analyses of 15 evaluative items identified four composite measures: Getting Timely Care, How Well Doctors and Nurses Communicate, Communication about Medications, and Communication about Follow‐up. Patient‐level internal consistency reliability exceeded 0.75 for two of four composites; ED‐level internal consistency reliability exceeded 0.83 for all four composites. Interunit reliability estimates indicated that 450 survey completes per ED results in at least 0.70 reliability for all composites. Higher scores on each composite were associated with higher overall ratings and willingness to recommend the ED.
Conclusions
The composite measures derived from the EDPEC DTC Survey are statistically reliable and valid. These results provide guidance for EDPEC DTC Survey adopters on how to construct meaningful and psychometrically‐sound composite measures for monitoring the quality of care they provide. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/1475-6773.13853 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8763294</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A694379443</galeid><sourcerecordid>A694379443</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c7133-9bc7e26bf0fa0dfebc176da337c91dbafaf5977f5aa519c95f86b2c5f9596223</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFklGL1DAQx4so3nr67JsUBFGwe03TNs2LcKznnbBwoPfmQ0jTSbdH2_SSdr399k7tumxl0RaaMPOb_0xnxvNek3BJ8LkgMUuClDG6JDRL6BNvcbA89RZhSFjASRSfeS-cuw_DMKNZ_Nw7ozHNojRLFt6Pz7CF2nQNtL0v28LfyroqZF-Z1jfal36H99EHjx1YvCkY7Upa8N1gt7DztbE-NGBLdO78Ajpp-1HOvfSeaVk7eLU_z727L1d3q5tgfXv9dXW5DhQjlAY8VwyiNNehlmGhIVeEpYWklClOilxqqRPOmE6kTAhXPNFZmkcq0TzhaRTRc-_TJNsNeQOFwtRW1qKzVSPtThhZibmnrTaiNFuRsZRGPEaB93sBax4GcL1oKqegrmULZnAiSlJsHKZiiL79C703g23x70SURmHIeUaOqFLWIKpWG8yrRlFxmWJCxuOYIhWcoLCLgEWaFnSF5hm_PMHjW0BTqZMBH2YByPTw2JdycE5k1-t_FbNnlalrKEHgvFa3c_7dEb8BWfcbZ-phXBw3Bz8egfngqhYcflxVbno31TLDLyZcWeOcBX2YIwnFuPJiXHAxLrj4vfIY8eZ4_Af-z44jkE7AT-zP7n964ubq-7dJ-RduEgi1</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2620099817</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Development and validation of a patient experience of care survey for emergency departments</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Ye, Feifei ; Parast, Layla ; Hays, Ron D. ; Elliott, Marc N. ; Becker, Kirsten ; Lehrman, William G. ; Stark, Debra ; Martino, Steven</creator><creatorcontrib>Ye, Feifei ; Parast, Layla ; Hays, Ron D. ; Elliott, Marc N. ; Becker, Kirsten ; Lehrman, William G. ; Stark, Debra ; Martino, Steven</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives
To (1) develop a survey to assess the patient experience of care in hospital‐based emergency departments (ED) and (2) evaluate the reliability and validity of composite measures of patient experience using data collected through the experimental implementation of the newly developed Emergency Department Patient Experience of Care (EDPEC) Discharged to Community (DTC) Survey.
Data Source
4893 adult patients were treated in the ED of 16 hospitals across the United States in 2018.
Study Design
The study utilized a cross‐sectional survey.
Data Collection
Survey development activities included a literature review, focus groups, and cognitive interviews with recently discharged ED patients, technical expert panels, and multiple field experiments. Survey development resulted in a 34‐item instrument; the analysis reported here focuses on 18 items on patient experience of care. Using data from the EDPEC DTC Survey in the 2018 Feasibility Test, we performed confirmatory factor analysis to group 15 evaluative survey items into composite measures. We examined internal consistency reliability, interunit reliability, and associations between each composite measure and patients' overall rating and willingness to recommend the ED.
Principal Findings
Analyses of 15 evaluative items identified four composite measures: Getting Timely Care, How Well Doctors and Nurses Communicate, Communication about Medications, and Communication about Follow‐up. Patient‐level internal consistency reliability exceeded 0.75 for two of four composites; ED‐level internal consistency reliability exceeded 0.83 for all four composites. Interunit reliability estimates indicated that 450 survey completes per ED results in at least 0.70 reliability for all composites. Higher scores on each composite were associated with higher overall ratings and willingness to recommend the ED.
Conclusions
The composite measures derived from the EDPEC DTC Survey are statistically reliable and valid. These results provide guidance for EDPEC DTC Survey adopters on how to construct meaningful and psychometrically‐sound composite measures for monitoring the quality of care they provide.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0017-9124</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1475-6773</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/1475-6773.13853</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34382685</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Cognitive ability ; Cognitive interviews ; Composite materials ; Confirmatory factor analysis ; Consistency ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Data collection ; emergency department ; Emergency medical care ; Emergency medical services ; Emergency service ; Emergency Service, Hospital ; Emergency services ; Evaluation ; Factor analysis ; Feasibility ; Field tests ; Hospital emergency services ; Hospitals ; Humans ; Literature reviews ; Medical care ; Medical care quality ; Medical personnel ; Nurses ; patient experience ; Patient Outcome Assessment ; Patient Satisfaction - statistics & numerical data ; Patients ; Physicians ; Polls & surveys ; Psychometrics ; Quality management ; Quality of care ; Quality of Health Care - standards ; Reliability ; Reliability analysis ; Reproducibility of Results ; Surveys and Questionnaires - standards ; United States ; validity ; Willingness</subject><ispartof>Health services research, 2022-02, Vol.57 (1), p.102-112</ispartof><rights>2021 Health Research and Educational Trust</rights><rights>2021 Health Research and Educational Trust.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2022 Health Research and Educational Trust</rights><rights>2022 Health Research and Educational Trust</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c7133-9bc7e26bf0fa0dfebc176da337c91dbafaf5977f5aa519c95f86b2c5f9596223</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c7133-9bc7e26bf0fa0dfebc176da337c91dbafaf5977f5aa519c95f86b2c5f9596223</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-7288-1009 ; 0000-0002-7147-5535 ; 0000-0001-6697-907X ; 0000-0001-7212-3235 ; 0000-0002-1514-4133</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8763294/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8763294/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,1416,27923,27924,30998,45573,45574,53790,53792</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34382685$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ye, Feifei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parast, Layla</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hays, Ron D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elliott, Marc N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Becker, Kirsten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lehrman, William G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stark, Debra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martino, Steven</creatorcontrib><title>Development and validation of a patient experience of care survey for emergency departments</title><title>Health services research</title><addtitle>Health Serv Res</addtitle><description>Objectives
To (1) develop a survey to assess the patient experience of care in hospital‐based emergency departments (ED) and (2) evaluate the reliability and validity of composite measures of patient experience using data collected through the experimental implementation of the newly developed Emergency Department Patient Experience of Care (EDPEC) Discharged to Community (DTC) Survey.
Data Source
4893 adult patients were treated in the ED of 16 hospitals across the United States in 2018.
Study Design
The study utilized a cross‐sectional survey.
Data Collection
Survey development activities included a literature review, focus groups, and cognitive interviews with recently discharged ED patients, technical expert panels, and multiple field experiments. Survey development resulted in a 34‐item instrument; the analysis reported here focuses on 18 items on patient experience of care. Using data from the EDPEC DTC Survey in the 2018 Feasibility Test, we performed confirmatory factor analysis to group 15 evaluative survey items into composite measures. We examined internal consistency reliability, interunit reliability, and associations between each composite measure and patients' overall rating and willingness to recommend the ED.
Principal Findings
Analyses of 15 evaluative items identified four composite measures: Getting Timely Care, How Well Doctors and Nurses Communicate, Communication about Medications, and Communication about Follow‐up. Patient‐level internal consistency reliability exceeded 0.75 for two of four composites; ED‐level internal consistency reliability exceeded 0.83 for all four composites. Interunit reliability estimates indicated that 450 survey completes per ED results in at least 0.70 reliability for all composites. Higher scores on each composite were associated with higher overall ratings and willingness to recommend the ED.
Conclusions
The composite measures derived from the EDPEC DTC Survey are statistically reliable and valid. These results provide guidance for EDPEC DTC Survey adopters on how to construct meaningful and psychometrically‐sound composite measures for monitoring the quality of care they provide.</description><subject>Cognitive ability</subject><subject>Cognitive interviews</subject><subject>Composite materials</subject><subject>Confirmatory factor analysis</subject><subject>Consistency</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>emergency department</subject><subject>Emergency medical care</subject><subject>Emergency medical services</subject><subject>Emergency service</subject><subject>Emergency Service, Hospital</subject><subject>Emergency services</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Factor analysis</subject><subject>Feasibility</subject><subject>Field tests</subject><subject>Hospital emergency services</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Medical care</subject><subject>Medical care quality</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Nurses</subject><subject>patient experience</subject><subject>Patient Outcome Assessment</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Physicians</subject><subject>Polls & surveys</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Quality management</subject><subject>Quality of care</subject><subject>Quality of Health Care - standards</subject><subject>Reliability</subject><subject>Reliability analysis</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires - standards</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>validity</subject><subject>Willingness</subject><issn>0017-9124</issn><issn>1475-6773</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>N95</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFklGL1DAQx4so3nr67JsUBFGwe03TNs2LcKznnbBwoPfmQ0jTSbdH2_SSdr399k7tumxl0RaaMPOb_0xnxvNek3BJ8LkgMUuClDG6JDRL6BNvcbA89RZhSFjASRSfeS-cuw_DMKNZ_Nw7ozHNojRLFt6Pz7CF2nQNtL0v28LfyroqZF-Z1jfal36H99EHjx1YvCkY7Upa8N1gt7DztbE-NGBLdO78Ajpp-1HOvfSeaVk7eLU_z727L1d3q5tgfXv9dXW5DhQjlAY8VwyiNNehlmGhIVeEpYWklClOilxqqRPOmE6kTAhXPNFZmkcq0TzhaRTRc-_TJNsNeQOFwtRW1qKzVSPtThhZibmnrTaiNFuRsZRGPEaB93sBax4GcL1oKqegrmULZnAiSlJsHKZiiL79C703g23x70SURmHIeUaOqFLWIKpWG8yrRlFxmWJCxuOYIhWcoLCLgEWaFnSF5hm_PMHjW0BTqZMBH2YByPTw2JdycE5k1-t_FbNnlalrKEHgvFa3c_7dEb8BWfcbZ-phXBw3Bz8egfngqhYcflxVbno31TLDLyZcWeOcBX2YIwnFuPJiXHAxLrj4vfIY8eZ4_Af-z44jkE7AT-zP7n964ubq-7dJ-RduEgi1</recordid><startdate>202202</startdate><enddate>202202</enddate><creator>Ye, Feifei</creator><creator>Parast, Layla</creator><creator>Hays, Ron D.</creator><creator>Elliott, Marc N.</creator><creator>Becker, Kirsten</creator><creator>Lehrman, William G.</creator><creator>Stark, Debra</creator><creator>Martino, Steven</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Health Research and Educational Trust</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>N95</scope><scope>XI7</scope><scope>8GL</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7288-1009</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7147-5535</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6697-907X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7212-3235</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1514-4133</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202202</creationdate><title>Development and validation of a patient experience of care survey for emergency departments</title><author>Ye, Feifei ; Parast, Layla ; Hays, Ron D. ; Elliott, Marc N. ; Becker, Kirsten ; Lehrman, William G. ; Stark, Debra ; Martino, Steven</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c7133-9bc7e26bf0fa0dfebc176da337c91dbafaf5977f5aa519c95f86b2c5f9596223</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Cognitive ability</topic><topic>Cognitive interviews</topic><topic>Composite materials</topic><topic>Confirmatory factor analysis</topic><topic>Consistency</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>emergency department</topic><topic>Emergency medical care</topic><topic>Emergency medical services</topic><topic>Emergency service</topic><topic>Emergency Service, Hospital</topic><topic>Emergency services</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Factor analysis</topic><topic>Feasibility</topic><topic>Field tests</topic><topic>Hospital emergency services</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Medical care</topic><topic>Medical care quality</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Nurses</topic><topic>patient experience</topic><topic>Patient Outcome Assessment</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Physicians</topic><topic>Polls & surveys</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Quality management</topic><topic>Quality of care</topic><topic>Quality of Health Care - standards</topic><topic>Reliability</topic><topic>Reliability analysis</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires - standards</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>validity</topic><topic>Willingness</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ye, Feifei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parast, Layla</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hays, Ron D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elliott, Marc N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Becker, Kirsten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lehrman, William G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stark, Debra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martino, Steven</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale Business: Insights</collection><collection>Business Insights: Essentials</collection><collection>Gale In Context: High School</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Health services research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ye, Feifei</au><au>Parast, Layla</au><au>Hays, Ron D.</au><au>Elliott, Marc N.</au><au>Becker, Kirsten</au><au>Lehrman, William G.</au><au>Stark, Debra</au><au>Martino, Steven</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Development and validation of a patient experience of care survey for emergency departments</atitle><jtitle>Health services research</jtitle><addtitle>Health Serv Res</addtitle><date>2022-02</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>102</spage><epage>112</epage><pages>102-112</pages><issn>0017-9124</issn><eissn>1475-6773</eissn><abstract>Objectives
To (1) develop a survey to assess the patient experience of care in hospital‐based emergency departments (ED) and (2) evaluate the reliability and validity of composite measures of patient experience using data collected through the experimental implementation of the newly developed Emergency Department Patient Experience of Care (EDPEC) Discharged to Community (DTC) Survey.
Data Source
4893 adult patients were treated in the ED of 16 hospitals across the United States in 2018.
Study Design
The study utilized a cross‐sectional survey.
Data Collection
Survey development activities included a literature review, focus groups, and cognitive interviews with recently discharged ED patients, technical expert panels, and multiple field experiments. Survey development resulted in a 34‐item instrument; the analysis reported here focuses on 18 items on patient experience of care. Using data from the EDPEC DTC Survey in the 2018 Feasibility Test, we performed confirmatory factor analysis to group 15 evaluative survey items into composite measures. We examined internal consistency reliability, interunit reliability, and associations between each composite measure and patients' overall rating and willingness to recommend the ED.
Principal Findings
Analyses of 15 evaluative items identified four composite measures: Getting Timely Care, How Well Doctors and Nurses Communicate, Communication about Medications, and Communication about Follow‐up. Patient‐level internal consistency reliability exceeded 0.75 for two of four composites; ED‐level internal consistency reliability exceeded 0.83 for all four composites. Interunit reliability estimates indicated that 450 survey completes per ED results in at least 0.70 reliability for all composites. Higher scores on each composite were associated with higher overall ratings and willingness to recommend the ED.
Conclusions
The composite measures derived from the EDPEC DTC Survey are statistically reliable and valid. These results provide guidance for EDPEC DTC Survey adopters on how to construct meaningful and psychometrically‐sound composite measures for monitoring the quality of care they provide.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>34382685</pmid><doi>10.1111/1475-6773.13853</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7288-1009</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7147-5535</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6697-907X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7212-3235</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1514-4133</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0017-9124 |
| ispartof | Health services research, 2022-02, Vol.57 (1), p.102-112 |
| issn | 0017-9124 1475-6773 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8763294 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); Wiley Online Library All Journals; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Cognitive ability Cognitive interviews Composite materials Confirmatory factor analysis Consistency Cross-Sectional Studies Data collection emergency department Emergency medical care Emergency medical services Emergency service Emergency Service, Hospital Emergency services Evaluation Factor analysis Feasibility Field tests Hospital emergency services Hospitals Humans Literature reviews Medical care Medical care quality Medical personnel Nurses patient experience Patient Outcome Assessment Patient Satisfaction - statistics & numerical data Patients Physicians Polls & surveys Psychometrics Quality management Quality of care Quality of Health Care - standards Reliability Reliability analysis Reproducibility of Results Surveys and Questionnaires - standards United States validity Willingness |
| title | Development and validation of a patient experience of care survey for emergency departments |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T09%3A08%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Development%20and%20validation%20of%20a%20patient%20experience%20of%20care%20survey%20for%20emergency%20departments&rft.jtitle=Health%20services%20research&rft.au=Ye,%20Feifei&rft.date=2022-02&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=102&rft.epage=112&rft.pages=102-112&rft.issn=0017-9124&rft.eissn=1475-6773&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/1475-6773.13853&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA694379443%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2620099817&rft_id=info:pmid/34382685&rft_galeid=A694379443&rfr_iscdi=true |