ArticleDie Anaesthesiologie2023
Patient satisfaction with divided anesthesia care.
Article in Die Anaesthesiologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Validation of a rapid anesthesia satisfaction scale in the anesthetic procedure].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2024Article
- Patient-reported perioperative anaesthesia-related anxiety is associated with impaired patient satisfaction: a secondary analysis from a prospective observational study in Switzerland.Scientific reports · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUp to now, no prospective cohort study using a validated questionnaire has assessed patients' expectation and perception of divided anesthesia care and its influence on patient satisfaction.
objectiveWe assessed patient satisfaction with divided anesthesia care in a district general hospital in Switzerland. We hypothesized that patient expectations, combined with their perceptions of the (un)importance of continuous anesthesia care would influence patient satisfaction. MATERIAL AND
methodsA total of 484 eligible in-patients receiving anesthesia from October 2019 to February 2020 were included and received preoperative information about divided care via a brochure and face-to-face. The primary outcome was the assessment of patient satisfaction with divided anesthesia care using a validated questionnaire. In group 1 continuity of care was considered important but not performed. In group 2 continuity was ensured. In group 3 continuity was regarded as not important and was not performed. In group 4 patients could not remember or did not answer. A psychometrically developed validated questionnaire was sent to patients at home after discharge.
resultsA total of 484 completed questionnaires (response rate 81%) were analyzed. In group 1 (n = 110) the mean total dissatisfaction score was 25% (95% confidence interval [CI] 21.8-28.1), in group 2 (n = 61) 6.8% (95% CI 4.8-8.7), in group 3 (n = 223) 12.1% (95% CI 10.7-13.4), and in group 4 (n = 90) 15% (95% CI 11-18); ANOVA: p < 0.001, η = 0.43. Of the patients 286 (59%) considered continuity of care by the same anesthetist relatively unimportant (34%) or not important at all (25%). The other 40% considered it important (22%) or very important (18%).
conclusionDespite receiving comprehensive preoperative information about divided anesthesia care, 40% of patients still considered continuity of care by the same anesthetist important. We recommend further research evaluating whether and how patient expectations can be modified towards the common practice of divided care and patient satisfaction can be increased.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.