Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31727670›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Evaluation of patient experience in county-level public hospitals in China: a multicentred, cross-sectional study.

Rui Min, Lu Li, Chunyan Zi, Pengqian Fang, Biyan Wang, Changmin Tang

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A review on factors related to patient comfort experience in hospitals.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Who Is More Satisfied with Health Services? A Cross-Sectional Study in China.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Rui MinSchool of Public health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4036-2933
Lu LiSchool of Medicine and Health Management, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Chunyan ZiSchool of Medicine and Health Management, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Pengqian Fang *Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science& Technology, Wuhan, China pfang@mails.tjmu.edu.cn 83674725@qq.com.ORCID 0000-0002-8928-1763
Biyan Wang *School of Public Health and Management, GuangXi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, China pfang@mails.tjmu.edu.cn 83674725@qq.com.
Changmin TangSchool of Management, Hubei University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPatient experience is being widely considered in the evaluation of healthcare service quality, which is a key target for public hospitals under China's New Healthcare Reform. This study aimed to illustrate patients' experiences in county-level public hospitals, and identify aspects that need to be improved. SETTING AND

participantsBetween 2016 and 2018, a cross-sectional study with 500 outpatients and 800 inpatients was conducted in 10 county-level public hospitals from Shandong Province, Hubei Province and Chongqing Municipality.

methodA three-part questionnaire was used to evaluate patients' experiences during their visits to hospitals. It comprised a questionnaire for basic information, the Picker Patient Experience (PPE-15) Questionnaire and the overall evaluation (a 3-point Likert scale to express patients' satisfaction and patient loyalty). Patients' experiences were classified according to six dimensions (information transmission and patient education, respect for patient preference, emotional support, physical comfort, involvement of family or friends and continuity of medical service). Both univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate patient experience.

resultsA total of 1241 valid questionnaires were analysed. The mean PPE-15 score was 41.33 (range, 23-56). The better the patient experience and satisfaction, the higher the patient loyalty (p<0.001). Except for hospital disparities, patients' age and occupation status had a significant impact on patient experience (p<0.05). Of the six dimensions, the physical comfort score was the highest, while the respect for patient preference score was the lowest. Additionally, a strong correlation was found between the respect for patient preference dimension and patients' overall satisfaction with their treatment experience.

conclusionsHospital managers and staff members should pay close attention to the preferences of patients and their families to improve patient experience.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthAdolescentAdultAgedChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Care ReformHospitals, PublicHumansInpatientsMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisOutpatientsPatient Satisfactionhealth service safetyhealth services managementpatient experiencesquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID31727670
PMCPMC6886962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.