Parental Perspectives on Pediatric Surgical Recovery: Narrative Analysis of Free-Text Comments From a Postoperative Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Qualitative experience data can inform health care providers how to best support families during pediatric postoperative recovery. Patient experience data can also provide actionable information to guide health care quality improvement; positive feedback can confirm the efficacy of current practices and systems, while negative comments can identify areas for improvement. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand families' perspectives regarding their children's surgical recovery using qualitative patient experience data (free-text comments) from a prospective cohort study conducted within a larger study developing a postoperative-outcome risk stratification model. METHODS: Participants were parents or guardians of children aged 0-18 years who underwent surgery at a pediatric tertiary care facility; children undergoing either outpatient or inpatient procedures were eligible to be enrolled. Participants with English as a second language were offered translational services during the consent process and were included if any family member could translate the surveys into their preferred language. Participants were ineligible if they and their families could not understand English or the child had a neurodevelopmental disability. Perioperative data were collected from families using web-based surveys, including 1 preoperative survey and follow-up surveys sent on postoperative days 1, 2, 3, 7, 15, 30, and 90. Surveys were completed until the family indicated the child was fully recovered or until postoperative day 90 was reached. Follow-up surveys included opportunities to leave free-text comments on the child's surgical experience. RESULTS: In total, 91% (453/500) of enrolled families completed at least 1 postoperative survey; 53% (242/453) provided at least 1 free-text comment and were included in the presented analysis, based on a total of 485 comments. The patient's age distribution was bimodal (modes at 2-3 and 14-15 years), with 66% (160/242) being male. Patients underwent orthopedic (60/242, 25%), urological (39/242, 16%), general (36/242,15%), otolaryngological (31/242, 13%), ophthalmological (32/242, 13%), dental (27/242, 11%), and plastic (17/242, 7%) surgeries. Largely positive comments (398/485, 82%) were made on the recovery and clinical care experience. A key theme for improvement included "communication," with subthemes highlighting parental concerns regarding the "preoperative discussions," "clarity of discharge instructions," and "continuity of care." Other themes included "length of stay" and "recovery experience." Feedback also suggested survey design amendments for future iterations of this instrument. CONCLUSIONS: Collecting parental recovery feedback is feasible and valued by families. Findings underscored the significance of enhancing communication strategies between health care providers and parents to align expectations and support proactive family-centered care. Our postoperative surveys allowed families to provide actionable suggestions for improving their experience, which may not have been considered during their hospital encounter. Our longitudinal survey protocol may be expanded to support continuous quality improvement initiatives involving near-real-time patient feedback to improve the health care experience of patients and families.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".