How to adjust the expected waiting time to improve patient's satisfaction?

BACKGROUND

Long waiting time in hospital leads to patient's low satisfaction. In addition to reducing the actual waiting time (AWT), we can also improve satisfaction by adjusting the expected waiting time (EWT). Then how much can the EWT be adjusted to attribute a higher satisfaction?

METHODS

This study was conducted though experimental with hypothetical scenarios. A total of 303 patients who were treated by the same doctor from August 2021 to April 2022 voluntarily participated in this study. The patients were randomly divided into six groups: a control group (n = 52) and five experimental groups (n = 245). In the control group, the patients were asked their satisfaction degree regarding a communicated EWT (T₀) and AWT (T_a) under a hypothetical situation. In the experimental groups, in addition to the same T₀ and T_a as the control group, the patients were also asked about their satisfaction degree with the extended communicated EWT (T₁). Patients in five experimental groups were given T₁ values with 70, 80, 90, 100, and 110 min respectively. Patients in both control and experiment groups were asked to indicate their initial EWT, after given unfavorable information (UI) in a hypothetical situation, the experiment groups were asked to indicate their extended EWT. Each participant only participated in filling out one hypothetical scenario. 297 valid hypothetical scenarios were obtained from the 303 hypothetical scenarios given.

RESULTS

The experimental groups had significant differences between the initial indicated EWT and extended indicated EWT under the effect of UI (20 [10, 30] vs. 30 [10, 50], Z = -4.086, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in gender, age, education level and hospital visit history (χ² = 3.198, P = 0.270; χ² = 2.177, P = 0.903; χ² = 3.988, P = 0.678; χ² = 3.979, P = 0.264) in extended indicated EWT. As for patient's satisfaction, compared with the control group, significant differences were found when T₁ = 80 min (χ² = 13.511, P = 0.004), T₁ = 90 min (χ² = 12.207, P = 0.007) and T₁ = 100 min (χ² = 12.941, P = 0.005). When T₁ = 90 min, which is equal to the T_a, 69.4% (34/49) of the patients felt "very satisfied", this proportion is not only significantly higher than that of the control group (34/ 49 vs. 19/52, χ² = 10.916, P = 0.001), but also the highest among all groups. When T₁ = 100 min (10 min longer than T_a), 62.5% (30/48) of the patients felt "very satisfied", it is significantly higher than that of the control group (30/ 48 vs. 19/52, χ² = 6.732, P = 0.009). When T₁ = 80 min (10 min shorter than T_a), 64.8% (35/54) of the patients felt "satisfied", it is significantly higher than that of the control group (35/ 54 vs. 17/52, χ² = 10.938, P = 0.001). However, no significant difference was found when T₁ = 70 min (χ² = 7.747, P = 0.052) and T₁ = 110 min (χ² = 4.382, P = 0.223).

CONCLUSIONS

Providing UI prompts can extend the EWT. When the extended EWT is closer to the AWT, the patient's satisfaction level can be improved higher. Therefore, medical institutions can adjust the EWT of patient's through UI release according to the AWT of hospitals to improve patient's satisfaction.

Patient ergonomics: 10-year mapping review of patient-centered human factors

Patient ergonomics is the application of human factors or related disciplines to study and improve patients' and other non-professionals' performance of effortful work activities in pursuit of health goals. We performed a mapping review of 212 full-text patient ergonomics publications in two conference proceedings, 2007-2017. The review revealed a robust and growing body of literature on patient ergonomics, particularly in the areas of aging and chronic disease, tools and technologies, and evaluations of patient-centered interventions on outcomes such as usability, user acceptance, and performance. Findings highlighted gaps deserving future research, including research with understudied populations such as children, informal caregivers, networks and collectives (groups), and marginalized populations; on topics such as health promotion and transitions of care; and using longitudinal and experimental study designs. The growth of patient-centeredness in general and of patient ergonomics in particular compel other more focused reviews, new primary research, and developing a roadmap for future patient ergonomics research.