ArticleIrish journal of medical science2020
Patient satisfaction reporting-a cohort study comparing reporting of patient satisfaction pre- and post-discharge from hospital.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Patient Satisfaction With Hospital Foodservice During Treatment at a General Hospital in Mainland Greece.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025Article
- Article
- Current trends and future perspectives of stroke management through integrating health care team and nanodrug delivery strategy.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2023Review
- Patient experience in a surgical assessment unit following a closed-loop audit using a Kaizen Lean system.Irish journal of medical science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients' satisfaction reporting is important for assessing the quality of care in surgical practice. Post-discharge questionnaire reporting is considered best practice; however, the logistics of this method remains problematic.
aimsTo examine patient satisfaction response rates prior to and following discharge from the hospital in a general surgery department.
methodsTwo patient groups were examined: group 1-questionnaires were completed by patients prior to discharge; and group 2-questionnaires were posted to patients following discharge and were advised to return the questionnaire in a given time frame. The questionnaire design was based on the WHO strategy on measuring responsiveness guidelines tailored to a population of surgical patients.
resultsFour hundred and fifty patients were examined [group 1 (N = 150); group 2 (N = 300)]). Results from pre- and post-discharge questionnaires were similar in almost all parameters. The response rate dropped significantly in group 2, and the cost was also significantly higher.
conclusionsThere were no significant differences in reporting between pre- and post-discharge questionnaire responses. As pre-discharge reporting is more efficient, less costly and has a higher response rate, this should be considered the preferred practice in patient satisfaction assessments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31368005What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.