MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3096104154 · doi:10.1182/blood-2020-138855

Patient Satisfaction with Quality of Care of a New Multidisciplinary Thrombosis Service

2020· article· en· W3096104154 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Stephanie Young, Kwadwo Osei Bonsu, Tiffany Lee, Hai V. Nguyen, Rufaro S Chitsike

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiquePatient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Établissements canadiensSt. John’s Health Sciences CentreMemorial University of Newfoundland
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicinePatient satisfactionFamily medicineMultidisciplinary approachPharmacistThrombosisMedical emergencyEmergency medicinePharmacyNursingSurgery

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION As patient centered healthcare is becoming increasingly popular, it is important to assess patient satisfaction with this approach. We started a new multidisciplinary Adult Outpatient Thrombosis Service (TS) in October 2017 in a Canadian health authority servicing over 300 000 people. The TS is a comprehensive thrombosis and anticoagulation management program with unique, interrelated clinics providing the spectrum of care required for this patient group. The TS includes an Emergency Thrombosis Clinic for care after an acute episode of venous thromboembolism; Thrombosis Clinics addressing non-urgent thrombosis questions and follow up; Anticoagulation Management Clinics for patients on extended duration anticoagulation; and a Perioperative Anticoagulation Management Clinic for patients on anticoagulation requiring surgery or procedures. The TS is staffed by Pharmacists, a Thrombosis Physician/Hematologist, and Clerical staff. The objective of this study was to assess patient satisfaction with the TS. METHODS We conducted a cross sectional survey of patients attending at least one appointment at the TS between October 2017 and May 2019 and who had a valid mailing address available in the hospital records. Eligible patients (n=1058) were mailed an anonymous survey with a cover letter and self-addressed, return stamped envelope. Patient satisfaction with the TS was measured using the seven item Short Assessment of Patient Satisfaction (SAPS), a validated, convenient satisfaction survey tool. The SAPS assesses the core satisfaction domains including treatment satisfaction, explanation of treatment results, clinician care, participation in decision-making, respect by the clinician, time with the clinician, and satisfaction with clinic care. The SAPS utilizes 5-point responses (0-4), with the continuous score range from 0 (extremely dissatisfied) to 28 (extremely satisfied), and categorical responses (0-10 very dissatisfied, 11-18 dissatisfied, 19-26 satisfied, and 27-28 very satisfied). Additionally, five patient characteristic questions were included. Patients were also given the opportunity to respond to an open-ended question regarding the care they received. Participant characteristics and responses are presented using descriptive statistics; linear regression was used to explore variations across characteristics. Qualitative content analysis of open-ended question comments was used to further our understanding of the patient experience and perceived quality of care. RESULTS A total of 563 surveys were returned for a response rate of 53%. Nine were excluded due to more than 2 missing SAPS item answers. Most respondents (87%, n=481) were 50 years of age or older, and 51% (n=285) were male. About two-thirds (67%, n=368) had post-secondary education. About half (54%, n=296) were taking a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC), about one fifth taking warfarin (19%, n=102), or on no anticoagulant (19%, n=104) at the time of survey response. Almost half had taken the anticoagulant for 1 to 5 years at the time of survey response (47%, n=255), with the remainder split between less than 1 year (28%, n=152), and greater than 5 years (25%, n=137). The mean score for the SAPS was 22.1 (SD 4.1, range 8 to 28). Based on the categorical response, 85% were satisfied or very satisfied with the TS. Multivariate analysis showed that patients with post-secondary education were more satisfied with the TS (β=16.153, p=0.024), and patients taking warfarin were less satisfied with the TS (β= -15.832, p=0.039). The SAPS tool demonstrated a high internal consistency when assessed for reliability using Composite reliability tests (0.86). Forty percent (n=223) provided written responses to the open-ended question. The majority of responses described positive patient experiences and perceptions regarding the TS and quality of care received. Four major themes emerged: service organization and coordination of care, patient-provider relationship, pharmacist-led medication therapy management, and patient-centered delivery and communication of health information. CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this is the first survey to assess patient satisfaction with a multidisciplinary TS. We found a high proportion (85%) of respondents were satisfied with the care provided. Disclosures Young: Sanofi Canada: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria. Chitsike:Sanofi Canada: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer Canada: Research Funding.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,009
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,027

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,016
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,134
Tête enseignante GPT0,431
Écart entre enseignants0,297 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2020
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetPatient Satisfaction in HealthcareTravaux en français237 207