Ophthalmology Provider Ratings and Patient, Disease, and Appointment Factors.
J Patient Exp
; 8: 23743735211033750, 2021.
Article
in En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-34395846
ABSTRACT
The purpose of the current study is to examine how nonmodifiable sociodemographic, disease, appointment, management, and survey factors correlate with provider rating. This was a retrospective cross-sectional study conducted on 29 857 patient Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems surveys collected from January 2017 to January 2019 at a tertiary eye center. We included surveys of patients aged 18 years or older, who answered at least 4 of 6 subfield questions, and completed the survey within 90 days of the appointment. The main outcome was the odds of receiving top box score (TBS) of 10/10 on the survey question regarding overall provider rating. The results showed that the variables with higher odds of TBS included higher overall appointment attendance (odds ratio [OR] 2.66 [95% CI 1.23-5.75], P = .013); older patient age (OR 2.44 [95% CI 2.08-2.87], P < .001]; higher percentage of survey questions completed (OR 2.02 [95% CI 1.79-2.27], P < .001); better best corrected visual acuity (OR 1.85 [95% CI 1.3-2.64], P = .001); optometry clinic visit (OR 1.25 [95% CI 1.15-1.36], P < .001); having procedures (OR 1.19 [95% CI 1.04-1.36], P = .013), surgery scheduled (OR 1.18 [95% CI 1.03-1.36], P = .020], or refraction done (OR 1.16 [95% CI 1.08-1.25], P < .001); being seen by male providers (OR 1.11 [95% CI 1.04-1.17], P = .001); and having additional eye testing performed (OR 1.06 [95% CI 1.00-1.13], P = .048). Variables associated with lower odds of TBS included longer time to complete survey (OR 0.42 [95% CI 0.3-0.58], P = .001); new patient encounter (OR 0.62 [95% CI 0.58-0.65], P < .001); and glaucoma (OR 0.66 [95% CI 0.59-0.75], P < .001), cornea (OR 0.79 [95% CI 0.71-0.87], P < .001), or comprehensive clinic visits (OR 0.86 [95% CI 0.79-0.94], P < .001). Thus, nonmodifiable factors may affect the provider rating, and these factors should be studied further and accounted for when interpreting the results of patient experience surveys.
Full text:
1
Collection:
01-internacional
Database:
MEDLINE
Type of study:
Observational_studies
/
Risk_factors_studies
Language:
En
Journal:
J Patient Exp
Year:
2021
Document type:
Article
Affiliation country: