Using Patient Experience Survey Data to Improve In-Center Hemodialysis Care: A Practical Review.

Patient experience is an integral aspect of the care we deliver to our dialysis patients. Standardized evaluation of patient experience with in-center hemodialysis started in the United States in 2012 with the In-Center Hemodialysis Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (ICH CAHPS) survey. Over time there have been a few changes to this survey, how it is administered, and how it fits within the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services End-Stage Renal Disease Quality Incentive Program. Although the importance of this survey has been growing, knowledge of this survey among nephrologists has lagged. We provide a review of the survey development and how its use has evolved since 2012. We discuss in detail research done on this survey to date, including survey psychometric evaluation. We highlight gaps in our knowledge that need further research and end with general recommendations to improve patient experience within hemodialysis facilities, which we believe is a worthy goal for all members of the dialysis team.

Randomized controlled trials 3: Measurement and analysis of patient-reported outcomes.

The study of patient-reported outcomes, now common in clinical research, had its origins in social and scientific developments during the latter twentieth century. Patient-reported outcomes comprise functional and health status, health-related quality of life, and quality of life. The terms overlap and are used inconsistently, and these reports of experience should be distinguished from expressions of preference regarding health states. Regulatory standards from the USA and European Union provide some guidance regarding reporting of patient-reported outcomes. The determination that measurement of patient-reported outcomes is important depends in part on the balance between subjective and objective outcomes of the health problem under study. Instrument selection depends to a large extent on practical considerations. A number of instruments can be identified that are frequently used in particular clinical situations. The domain coverage of commonly used generic short forms varies substantially. Individualized measurement of quality of life is possible, but resource intensive. Focus groups are useful, not only for scale development but also to confirm the appropriateness of existing instruments. Under classical test theory, validity and reliability are the critical characteristics of tests. Under item response theory, validity remains central, but the focus moves from the reliability of scales to the relative levels of traits in individuals and items' relative difficulty. Plans for clinical studies should include an explicit model of the relationship of patient-reported outcomes to other parameters, as well as definition of the magnitude of difference in patient-reported outcomes that will be considered important. It is particularly important to minimize missing patient-reported outcome data; to a limited extent, a variety of statistical techniques can mitigate the consequences of missing data.

Satisfaction with Care of Patients on Hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Little is known about patients receiving dialysis who respond to satisfaction and experience of care surveys and those who do not respond, nor is much known about the corollaries of satisfaction. This study examined factors predicting response to Dialysis Clinic, Inc. (DCI)'s patient satisfaction survey and factors associated with higher satisfaction among responders. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENT: A total of 10,628 patients receiving in-center hemodialysis care at 201 DCI facilities between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2011, aged ≥18 years, treated during the survey administration window, and at the facility for ≥3 months before survey administration. Primary outcome was response to at least one of the nine survey questions; secondary outcome was overall satisfaction with care. RESULTS: Response rate was 77.3%. In adjusted logistic regression (odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals), race other than black (white race, 1.23 [1.10 to 1.37]), missed treatments (1.16 [1.02 to 1.32]) or shortened treatments (≥5 treatments, 1.40 [1.22 to 1.60]), more hospital days (>3 days in the last 3 months, 1.89 [1.66 to 2.15]), and lower serum albumin (albumin level <3.5 g/dl, 1.4 [1.28 to 1.73]) all independently predicted nonresponse. In adjusted linear regression, the following were more satisfied with care: older patients (age ≥63 years, 1.84 [1.78 to 1.90]; age <63 years, 1.91 [1.86 to 1.97]; P<0.001), white patients (1.76 [1.71 to 1.81]) versus black patients (1.93 [1.88 to 1.99]) or those of other race (1.93 [1.83 to 2.03]) (P<0.001), patients with shorter duration of dialysis (≤2.5 years, 1.79 [1.73 to 1.84]; >2.5 years, 1.96 [1.91 to 2.02]; P<0.001), patients who had missed one or fewer treatments (1.83 [1.78 to 1.88]) versus those who had missed more than one treatment (1.92 [1.85 to 1.98]; P=0.002) and those who had shortened treatment (for one treatment or less, 1.84 [1.77 to 1.90]; for two to four treatments, 1.87 [1.81 to 1.93]; for five or more treatments, 1.92 [1.87 to 1.98]; P=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Survey results represent healthier and more adherent patients on hemodialysis. Shorter survey administration windows were associated with higher response rates. Older, white patients with shorter dialysis vintage were more satisfied.