Investigating the meaning of 'good' or 'very good' patient evaluations of care in English general practice: A mixed methods study

BMJ Open

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2017, Pages

  Burt, Jenni ^a   Newbould, Jenny ^a   Abel, Gary ^b   Elliott, Marc N ^c   Beckwith, Julia ^a   Llanwarne, Nadia ^a   Elmore, Natasha ^a   Davey, Antoinette ^b   Gibbons, Chris ^a   Campbell, John ^b   Roland, Martin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EXETER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^c RAND CORPORATION   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; CONSULTATION; DNA TRANSCRIPTION; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; ENGLAND; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; HUMAN VERSUS ANIMAL COMPARISON; INTERVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NONHUMAN; QUESTIONNAIRE; SKILL; VIDEORECORDING; YOUNG ADULT; AGED; GENERAL PRACTICE; LANGUAGE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; SOCIAL COMPETENCE; STANDARDS; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTICE; GENERAL PRACTITIONERS; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; SOCIAL SKILLS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 85014538799     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014718     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Anhang Price R, Elliott MN, Cleary PD, et al. Should health care providers be accountable for patients' care experiences? J Gen Intern Med 2015;30:253-6.
2. Contandriopoulos D, Champagne F, Denis JL. The multiple causal pathways between performance measures' use and effects. Med Care Res Rev 2014;71:3-20.
3. Fung CH, Lim YW, Mattke S, et al. Systematic review: the evidence that publishing patient care performance data improves quality of care. Ann Intern Med 2008;148:111-23.
4. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHCRQ). CAHPS Clinician and Group Surveys. 2015. https://cahps.ahrq.gov/ surveys-guidance/cg/index.html (accessed 13 Feb 2015).
5. Ipsos MORI. GP Patient Survey. 2015. https://gp-patient.co.uk/. (accessed 12 Feb 2015)
6. Care Quality Commission. How CQC regulates: NHS GP practices and GP out-of-hours services. Provider handbook. London: Care Quality Commission, January 2016. Available at https://www.cqc.org. uk/content/gp-practices-and-out-hours-service-providers#handbooks (accessed 22/02/2017).
7. Care Quality Commission. Intelligent Monitoring: NHS GP practices indicators and methodology guidance v9. 2015. http://www.cqc.org. uk/sites/default/files/20150513%20GP%20IM%202%20Indicators% 20and%20Methodology%20Guidance%20v9%20%28for%20release %29.pdf. (accessed 8 Dec 2015).
8. Bruster S, Jarman B, Bosanquet N, et al. National survey of hospital patients. BMJ 1994;309:1542-6.
9. Dougall A, Russell A, Rubin G, et al. Rethinking patient satisfaction: patient experiences of an open access flexible sigmoidoscopy service. Soc Sci Med 2000;50:53-62.
10. Burt J, Abel G, Elmore N, et al. Rating communication in GP consultations: the association between ratings made by patients and trained clinical raters. Med Care Res Rev 2016;1-18.
11. Edwards C, Staniszewska S, Crichton N. Investigation of the ways in which patients' reports of their satisfaction with healthcare are constructed. Sociol Health Illn 2006;26:159-83.
12. Williams B, Coyle J, Healy D. The meaning of patient satisfaction: an explanation of high reported levels. Soc Sci Med 1998;47:1351-9.
13. Fetters MD, Curry LA, Creswell JW. Achieving integration in mixed methods designs - principles and practices. Health Serv Res 2013;48:2134-56.
14. Ipsos MORI. GP patient survey: national summary report January 2015. (Ipsos MORI, 2015).
15. Malterud K, Siersma VD, Guassora AD. Sample size in qualitative interview studies guided by information power. Qual Health Res 2015. doi: 10.1177/1049732315617444. [Epub ahead of print 27 Nov 2015].
16. Henry SG, Fetters MD. Video elicitation interviews: a qualitative research method for investigating physician-patient interactions. Ann Fam Med 2012;10:118-25.
17. Pang B, Lee L, Vaithyanathan S. Thumbs up?: sentiment classification using machine learning techniques. In proceedings of the ACL-02 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing-Volume 10 79-86 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2002).
18. Turney PD. Thumbs up or thumbs down?: semantic orientation applied to unsupervised classification of reviews. In Proceedings of the 40th annual meeting on association for computational linguistics 417-424 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2002).
19. Wilson T, Wiebe J, Hoffmann P. Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis. In Proceedings of the conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing 347-354 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2005). doi:10.3115/ 1220575.1220619
20. Greaves F, Laverty AA, Cano DR, et al. Tweets about hospital quality: a mixed methods study. BMJ Qual Saf 2014;23:838-46.
21. Greaves F, Ramirez-Cano D, Millett C, et al. Use of sentiment analysis for capturing patient experience from free-text comments posted online. J Med Internet Res 2013;15:e239.
22. Roberts MJ, Campbell JL, Abel GA, et al. Understanding high and low patient experience scores in primary care: analysis of patients' survey data for general practices and individual doctors. BMJ 2014;349:g6034.
23. Burt J, Lloyd C, Campbell J, et al. Variations in GP-patient communication by ethnicity, age, and gender: evidence from a national primary care patient survey. Br J Gen Pr 2016;66:e47-52.
24. Lyratzopoulos G, Elliott M, Barbiere JM, et al. Understanding ethnic and other socio-demographic differences in patient experience of primary care: evidence from the English General Practice Patient Survey. BMJ Qual Saf 2012;21:21-9.
25. Scott WA. Reliability of content analysis: the case of nominal scale coding. Public Opin Q 1955;19:321.
26. Krippendorff K. Agreement and information in the reliability of coding. Commun. Methods Meas 2011;5:93-112.
27. Burt J. Following the mixed methods trail: some travel advice. Br J Gen Pr 2015;65:264-5.
28. Sandelowski M, Voils CI, Knafl G. On quantitizing. J Mix Methods Res 2009;3:208-22.
29. Elliott MN, Zaslavsky AM, Goldstein E, et al. Effects of survey mode, patient mix, and nonresponse on CAHPS hospital survey scores. Health Serv Res 2009;44:501-18.
30. Campbell J, Smith P, Nissen S, et al. The GP Patient Survey for use in primary care in the National Health Service in the UK - development and psychometric characteristics. BMC Fam Pract 2009;10:57.
31. Bjertnaes OA, Sjetne IS, Iversen HH. Overall patient satisfaction with hospitals: effects of patient-reported experiences and fulfilment of expectations. BMJ Qual Saf 2012;21:39-46.
32. Skudal KE, Garratt AM, Eriksson B, et al. The Nordic Patient Experiences Questionnaire (NORPEQ): cross-national comparison of data quality, internal consistency and validity in four Nordic countries. BMJ Open 2012;2:e000864.
33. Santuzzi NR, Brodnik MS, Rinehart-Thompson L, et al. Patient satisfaction: how do qualitative comments relate to quantitative scores on a satisfaction survey? Qual Manag Health Care 2009;18:3-18.
34. Iversen HH, Bjertnæs ØA, Skudal KE. Patient evaluation of hospital outcomes: an analysis of open-ended comments from extreme clusters in a national surveyBMJ Open 2014;4:e004848.
35. CAHPS Hospital Survey. HCAHPS Tables on HCAHPS On-Line. http://www.hcahpsonline.org/SummaryAnalyses.aspx (accessed 21 Sep 2016)
36. Lagu T, Goff SL, Hannon NS, et al. A mixed-methods analysis of patient reviews of hospital care in England: implications for public reporting of health care quality data in the United States. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf Jt Comm Resour 2013; 39:7-15.
37. Gibbons CJ, Richards S, Valderas JM, et al. Supervised machine learning algorithms can classify open-text feedback of doctor performance with human-level accuracy. J Med Internet Res 2016 (in press).