Maximizing Satisfaction in Orthopedic Outpatient Clinics: Evidence From Ireland.

Background Patient satisfaction is a critical metric in healthcare, reflecting the quality of care provided and influencing clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization. In orthopedic outpatient clinics, patient satisfaction affects patient adherence to treatment plans and overall health outcomes. This study aims to identify and analyze key factors influencing patient satisfaction in orthopedic outpatient clinics. Methodology This cross-sectional study was conducted from April to May 2024 across 10 orthopedic outpatient clinics. In this study, family members were included as respondents to the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ) when patients were unable to complete the survey due to age, cognitive impairment, or physical disabilities. This approach was adopted to ensure that the experiences of all patients, particularly minors, elderly individuals, and those with disabilities, were accurately captured. The PSQ assessed various aspects of patient satisfaction, including communication, treatment plans, addressing concerns, clinic environment, and overall satisfaction. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS version 27.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Results The study included 172 respondents. High levels of overall satisfaction were reported, with 142 (82.6%) respondents very satisfied and 28 (16.2%) somewhat satisfied. Significant associations were found between overall satisfaction and several factors, namely, effective communication, thorough explanation of treatment plans, addressing patient concerns, and a clean, comfortable clinic environment. Shorter waiting times were also associated with higher satisfaction. Regression analysis revealed that staff rating and the thoroughness of treatment plans were significant predictors of overall satisfaction. Conclusions Effective communication, thorough treatment explanations, addressing patient concerns, and maintaining a clean clinic environment are key determinants of patient satisfaction in orthopedic outpatient clinics. Reducing waiting times and investing in staff training on communication and empathetic care can further enhance patient satisfaction. These findings provide valuable insights for healthcare providers and administrators aiming to improve patient experiences in orthopedic outpatient settings. Further research is recommended to explore these relationships in diverse settings and develop targeted interventions.

Through Patients' Eyes: Evaluating the Consent Process in Elective Orthopedic Surgery at a Tertiary Referral Center in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Informed consent is a critical component of ethical clinical practice, particularly in elective orthopedic procedures. It ensures that patients understand the nature, benefits, and risks of the medical procedures they agree to undergo. This study aims to evaluate the informed consent process at Merlin Park University Hospital from the patient's perspective. METHODS: This cross-sectional observational study included 140 participants undergoing elective orthopedic procedures. Data were collected via a questionnaire focusing on socio-demographic information and the informed consent process, including details on who provided the information, where and when the consent was signed, and patient understanding and satisfaction. Responses were analyzed using SPSS version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). RESULTS: The majority of participants were females, with 80 (57.1%) women and 60 (42.9%) men. The average age of the participants was 60.86 years. Most participants were employed, constituting 75 (53.6%) of the sample, and 55 (39.3%) had attained university or higher education. The most common procedures were total hip replacement, with 30 (21.4%) participants, and total knee replacement, with 20 (14.3%) participants. Information during the consent process was primarily provided by consultants in 80 (57.1%) cases. High satisfaction levels were reported, with 139 (99.3%) participants expressing satisfaction. Significant correlations were found between satisfaction and the type of healthcare provider, type of operation, and educational level. CONCLUSION: The informed consent process at Merlin Park University Hospital is generally effective, with high patient satisfaction and understanding. However, there is a preference for concise information delivery. Enhancing the process through personalized information delivery could further improve patient satisfaction and comprehension. These findings contribute valuable insights into patient-centered care and informed consent in elective orthopedic surgeries.

Enhancing Clarity and Patient Safety: Evaluating the Inclusion of Laterality in Orthopaedic Outpatient Correspondence in Galway, Ireland.

Background In medical documentation, accurate mention of laterality, whether a condition or treatment pertains to the left or the right side of the body, is critical for avoiding errors like wrong-site surgeries, which can have severe repercussions. This study aims to assess compliance regarding the mention of laterality in outpatient clinic letters at Galway University Hospital. Methods An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted at Galway University Hospital from February to August. We reviewed outpatient letters in the Orthopaedic Department. The Fisher exact and Chi-square tests were employed to observe the association between the levels of practitioners and laterality. Results A total of 278 outpatient letters from 37 practitioners in one week were analyzed. The overall laterality rate was 65.1%. It was observed that there was a male predominance in the workforce (31; 83.8%). Conclusion In conclusion, our study revealed satisfactory improvement in the prevalence of mentioning laterality among healthcare providers. It is recommended that educational sessions and re-auditing be carried out to enhance the quality of care.

Assessing the Influence of Age, Weight, and Pirani Score on the Number of Casts During the Initial Phase of Clubfoot Treatment Using the Ponseti Method: A Prospective Study.

Background: Clubfoot, also known as congenital talipes equinovarus is a prevalent childhood ailment that, if untreated, can lead to long-term discomfort and impairment. The Ponseti technique, aimed at achieving corrected foot positioning, is widely accepted. This study investigated the influence of clubfoot severity (Pirani score), patient age, and initial manipulation and casting weight on the overall number of casts needed for effective treatment. Methods: A prospective study was carried out involving 40 idiopathic clubfoot patients where manipulation and casting were performed following the Ponseti method. Patient age, weight, and foot Pirani score were evaluated concerning the total number of casts needed to achieve 70° of abduction. Results: The majority of participants were male infants aged 4-6 months, with a median age of 4.5 months. Half of them weighed between 3.00 and 4.99 kg at their first hospital visit, with a median weight of 3.20 kg. Bilateral clubfoot involvement was common (57.5%). Children with Pirani HFCS 2.0-3 often required percutaneous tenotomy (87.5%, p value 0.05). On average, patients needed 5 casts (range 3-9). The mean total Pirani scores were 4.71 for the right foot and 4.61 for the left foot. The study reported a positive correlation between higher total Pirani scores and the required number of casts. Conclusions: The Pirani scoring system is highly accurate in assessing clubfoot severity and predicting treatment success. It emerged as the single most significant predictor for both the total number of casts and the need for percutaneous tenotomy.

Awareness and practice of patients' rights among hospitalized patients at Wad-Medani Teaching Hospital, Sudan.

Patients' rights are a fundamental human right and an important part of modern health care practice. This is a cross-sectional descriptive analytic study, conducted amongst 263 patients at Wadi-Medani Teaching Hospital, Sudan, in March-April 2015. Most patients (95.2%) did not know about the Bill of Rights and most of them (92.8%) were not able to mention any of the patients' rights. The most practiced rights were: the right to be asked for permission before examination (88.1%), proper handling (87.8%), safety of the hospital (87%), presence of a third person when examining a female by a male doctor (85.6%), and admission file confidentiality (75.5%). The awareness of Sudan FMOH Patients' Bill of Rights was very low among patients at Wad-Medani Teaching Hospital, yet they showed a high satisfaction rate probably due to their low socioeconomic status, educational level and expectations. Therefore, awareness of patients' rights must be increased.

Awareness and practice of patients' rights among hospitalized patients at Wad-Medani Teaching Hospital, Sudan

Patients' rights are a fundamental human right and an important part of modern health care practice. This is a cross-sectional descriptive analytic study, conducted amongst 263 patients at Wadi-Medani Teaching Hospital, Sudan, in March-April 2015. Most patients [95.2%] did not know about the Bill of Rights and most of them [92.8%] were not able to mention any of the patients' rights. The most practiced rights were: the right to be asked for permission before examination [88.1%], proper handling [87.8%], safety of the hospital [87%], presence of a third person when examining a female by a male doctor [85.6%], and admission file confidentiality [75.5%]. The awareness of Sudan FMOH Patients' Bill of Rights was very low among patients at Wad-Medani Teaching Hospital, yet they showed a high satisfaction rate probably due to their low socioeconomic status, educational level and expectations. Therefore, awareness of patients' rights must be increased

Les droits des patients constituent un droit humain fondamental et représentent une partie importante de la pratique des soins de santé modernes. Le présent article concerne une étude analytique descriptive transversale menée auprès de 263 patients entre mars et avril 2015. La plupart des patients [95,2%] n'étaient pas au courant de l'existence de la déclaration des droits, et la majorité d'entre eux [92,8%] n'était pas en mesure de citer ne seraitce qu'un droit des patients. Les droits appliqués le plus souvent étaient les suivants : le droit à être consulté avant tout examen clinique [88,1%], un traitement adéquat [87,8%], la sécurité des hôpitaux [87%], la présence d'une tierce personne lors de l'examen d'une patiente par un docteur de sexe masculin [85,6%], et la confidentialité des dossiers d'admission [75,5%]. Un très faible pourcentage des patients de l'hôpital universitaire de Wad-Medani avait connaissance de la déclaration des droits des patients du ministère fédéral de la Santé soudanais. Pour autant, les patients affichaient un taux élevé de satisfaction, certainement dû à leur faible statut socio-économique, à leur bas niveau d'éducation et à leurs attentes limitées. La connaissance du droit des patients doit donc être améliorée