Patient satisfaction with divided anesthesia care
Background Up to now, no prospective cohort study using a validated questionnaire has assessed patients’ expectation and perception of divided anesthesia care and its influence on patient satisfaction. Objective We assessed patient satisfaction with divided anesthesia care in a district general hosp...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Die Anaesthesiologie 2023-02, Vol.72 (2), p.97-105 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background
Up to now, no prospective cohort study using a validated questionnaire has assessed patients’ expectation and perception of divided anesthesia care and its influence on patient satisfaction.
Objective
We assessed patient satisfaction with divided anesthesia care in a district general hospital in Switzerland. We hypothesized that patient expectations, combined with their perceptions of the (un)importance of continuous anesthesia care would influence patient satisfaction.
Material and methods
A total of 484 eligible in-patients receiving anesthesia from October 2019 to February 2020 were included and received preoperative information about divided care via a brochure and face-to-face. The primary outcome was the assessment of patient satisfaction with divided anesthesia care using a validated questionnaire. In group 1 continuity of care was considered important but not performed. In group 2 continuity was ensured. In group 3 continuity was regarded as not important and was not performed. In group 4 patients could not remember or did not answer. A psychometrically developed validated questionnaire was sent to patients at home after discharge.
Results
A total of 484 completed questionnaires (response rate 81%) were analyzed. In group 1 (
n
= 110) the mean total dissatisfaction score was 25% (95% confidence interval [CI] 21.8–28.1), in group 2 (
n
= 61) 6.8% (95% CI 4.8–8.7), in group 3 (
n
= 223) 12.1% (95% CI 10.7–13.4), and in group 4 (
n
= 90) 15% (95% CI 11–18); ANOVA:
p
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 2731-6858 2731-6866 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00101-022-01192-x |