The Impact of Demographics on Child and Parent Ratings of Satisfaction with Hospital Care

Introduction

Patient satisfaction ratings differ between minority and nonminority respondents in studies of hospitalized adults, but little is known about such differences in pediatrics. Our goal was to determine if patient satisfaction ratings completed by hospitalized children and their parents at the point of discharge differed by race/ethnicity, language, child gender, and age.

Methods

We used a mixed-methods design. English and Spanish-speaking families from 5 inpatient units at 1 pediatric hospital completed ratings, face-to-face, before scheduled hospital discharge (T1), and again by telephone after discharge (T2). Participating children and their parents completed an 8-item satisfaction survey, and parents additionally completed 7 discharge readiness items.

Results

The refusal rate was 10.7%, with 600 families enrolled; non-white families represented 66% of both study refusals and completions. The proportion of racial/ethnic groups in our study exceeded those in our standard survey sample. There were no significant differences in satisfaction ratings between non-white and white families or by child gender, age, or language.

Conclusions

The lack of rating differences by demographic characteristics, the low refusal and attrition rates, and a more racially/ethnically representative sample of both child and parent perspectives indicate this approach to measuring satisfaction is acceptable and feasible to demographically diverse families.

Racial/Ethnic Differences in Primary Care Experiences in Patient-Centered Medical Homes among Veterans with Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders

BACKGROUND

Patient-Centered Medical Homes (PCMH) may be effective in managing care for racial/ethnic minorities with mental health and/or substance use disorders (MHSUDs). How such patients experience care in PCMH settings is relatively unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to examine racial/ethnic differences in experiences with primary care in PCMH settings among Veterans with MHSUDs.

DESIGN

We used multinomial regression methods to estimate racial/ethnic differences in PCMH experiences reported on a 2013 national survey of Veterans Affairs patients.

PARTICPANTS

Veterans with past-year MHSUD diagnoses (n = 65,930; 67 % White, 20 % Black, 11 % Hispanic, 1 % American Indian/Alaska Native[AI/AN], and 1 % Asian/Pacific Island[A/PI]).

MAIN MEASURES

Positive and negative experiences from the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) PCMH Survey.

RESULTS

Veterans with MHSUDs reported the lowest frequency of positive experiences with access (22 %) and the highest frequency of negative experiences with self-management support (30 %) and comprehensiveness (16 %). Racial/ethnic differences (as compared to Whites) were observed in all seven healthcare domains (p values < 0.05). With access, Blacks and Hispanics reported more negative (Risk Differences [RDs] = 2 .0;3.6) and fewer positive (RDs = -2 .3;-2.3) experiences, while AI/ANs reported more negative experiences (RD = 5.7). In communication, Blacks reported fewer negative experiences (RD = -1.3); AI/ANs reported more negative (RD = 3.6) experiences; and AI/ANs and APIs reported fewer positive (RD = -6.5, -6.7) experiences. With office staff, Hispanics reported fewer positive experiences (RDs = -3.0); AI/ANs and A/PIs reported more negative experiences (RDs =  3.4; 3.7). For comprehensiveness, Blacks reported more positive experiences (RD = 3.6), and Hispanics reported more negative experiences (RD = 2.7). Both Blacks and Hispanics reported more positive (RDs = 2.3; 4.2) and fewer negative (RDs = -1.8; -1.9) provider ratings, and more positive experiences with decision making (RDs = 2.4; 3.0). Blacks reported more positive (RD = 3.9) and fewer negative (RD = -5.1) experiences with self-management support.

CONCLUSIONS

In a national sample of Veterans with MHSUDs, potential deficiencies were observed in access, self-management support, and comprehensiveness. Racial/ethnic minorities reported worse experiences than Whites with access, comprehensiveness, communication, and office staff helpfulness/courtesy.

Patient satisfaction with community pharmacy: comparing urban and suburban chain-pharmacy populations

BACKGROUND

Patient satisfaction with pharmaceutical care can be a strong predictor of medication and other health-related outcomes. Less understood is the role that location of pharmacies in urban or suburban environments plays in patient satisfaction with pharmacy and pharmacist services.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to serve as a pilot examining urban and suburban community pharmacy populations for similarities and differences in patient satisfaction.

METHODS

Community pharmacy patients were asked to self-administer a 30-question patient satisfaction survey. Fifteen questions addressed their relationship with the pharmacist, 10 questions addressed satisfaction and accessibility of the pharmacy, and five questions addressed financial concerns. Five urban and five suburban pharmacies agreed to participate. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and chi-square analysis.

RESULTS

Most patients reported high levels of satisfaction. Satisfaction with pharmacist relationship and service was 70% or higher with no significant differences between locations. There were significant differences between the urban and suburban patients regarding accessibility of pharmacy services, customer service and some patient/pharmacist trust issues.

CONCLUSIONS

The significant differences between patient satisfaction in the suburban and urban populations warrant a larger study with more community pharmacies in other urban, suburban and rural locations to better understand and validate study findings.

A brief self-affirmation study to improve the experience of minority patients

BACKGROUND

There is evidence that Black patients may experience stereotype threat--apprehension about being negatively stereotyped--in healthcare settings, which might adversely affect their behavior in clinical encounters. Recent studies conducted outside of healthcare have shown that a brief self-affirmation intervention, in which individuals are asked to focus on and affirm their valued characteristics and sources of personal pride, can reduce the negative effects of stereotype threat on academic performance and on interpersonal communication.

METHODS

This randomised controlled trial examined whether a self-affirmation (SA) intervention would decrease the negative effects of stereotype threat (negative mood, lower state self-esteem, greater perceptions of racial discrimination) and increase communication self-efficacy among Black primary care patients. Self-affirmation was induced by having patients complete a 32-item values affirmation questionnaire.

RESULTS

Patients in the SA condition had lower levels of performance self-esteem and social self-esteem than patients in the control. There were no differences between the SA and the control groups on negative mood, communication self-efficacy, and perceptions of discrimination.

CONCLUSIONS

Our SA intervention lowered state self-esteem among Black patients. Future research is needed to determine the type of SA task that is most effective for this population.

Comparison of health confidence in rural, suburban and urban areas in the UK and the USA: a secondary analysis

OBJECTIVE

Confidence in healthcare may influence the patients' utilisation of healthcare resources and perceptions of healthcare quality. We sought to determine whether self-reported confidence in healthcare differed between the UK and the USA, as well as by rurality or urbanicity.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis of a subset of survey questions regarding self-reported confidence in healthcare from the 2010 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey.

SETTING

Telephone survey of participants from the UK and the USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Our final analysis included 1511 UK residents (688 rural, 446 suburban, 372 urban, 5 uncategorised) and 2501 US residents (536 rural, 1294 suburban, 671 urban).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Questions assessed respondents' confidence in the effectiveness and affordability of the treatment. We compared survey outcomes from these questions between, and within, the two regions and among, and within, residence types (rural, suburban and urban).

RESULTS

Significant differences were found in self-reported confidence in healthcare between the UK and US, among residence types, and between the two regions within residence types. Reported levels were higher in the UK. Within regions, significant differences by residence type were found for the US, but not the UK. Within the US, suburban respondents had the highest self-reported confidence in healthcare.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant differences exist between the UK and US in confidence in healthcare. In the US, but not in the UK, self-reported confidence is related to residence type. Within countries, significant differences by residence type were found for the US, but not the UK. Our findings warrant the examination of causes for relative confidence levels in healthcare between regions and among US residence types.