Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38435893›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Patient Satisfaction in Neurosurgery Clinic.

Alice S Wang, James G Wiginton, Theo Tran, Paulino Yanez, Christopher King, Dan E Miulli

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Alice S WangNeurosurgery, Riverside University Health System Medical Center, Moreno Valley, USA.
James G WigintonNeurosurgery, Riverside University Health System Medical Center, Moreno Valley, USA.
Theo TranNeurosurgery, California University of Science and Medicine, Colton, USA.
Paulino YanezNeurosurgery, Kaiser Fontana Medical Center, Fontana, USA.
Christopher KingNeurosurgery, Riverside University Health System Medical Center, Colton, USA.
Dan E MiulliNeurosurgery, Riverside University Health System Medical Center, Moreno Valley, USA.
Arrowhead Regional Medical Center · USRiverside University Health System - Medical Center · USKaiser Permanente Fontana Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNational commercial surveys are used to assess patient satisfaction. However, the information obtained does not always correspond to the clinical situation and therefore may be inadequate to help improve a specific patient experience when through no fault of its design, results in low response rates and inadequate specifics.

objectiveThe objective is to investigate patient satisfaction using real-time in-person patient experience survey responses at the end of a neurosurgical clinic visit and review the results from these survey responses and those from national commercial survey responses provided by the hospital for the ability to affect change.

methodsThis is a prospective study from October 2023 to December 2023 during which a paper copy of 10 questionnaires derived from a national commercial outpatient clinical survey was given to every unique patient who was neurologically capable of filling it out at the end of his or her neurosurgery clinic visit. The electronic medical record was used to collect patient demographics and details of the clinic visit. National commercial survey responses from July 2022 to November 2023 provided by the hospital were reviewed.

resultsA total of 149 patients were seen in the neurosurgery clinic from October 2023 to December 2023, 121 patients were given the in-person patient satisfaction survey, and the response rate was 100%. The mean age was 46.5 years with females constituted 45.5% of the patient sample. The visit type included 46 (38.0%) new patients, 53 (43.8%) returning patients, and 22 (18.2%) post-op patients, of which 45.5% presented with cranial pathologies. Comparing the patient satisfaction level between those seen by one provider and those seen by two providers, such as resident, or mid-level with attending, patients seen by two providers were less satisfied with "feeling respected by the providers" (4.92 vs. 4.64, p=0.0088), "feeling listened to by the providers" (4.84 vs. 4.50, p=0.0180), and "feeling appreciated that the providers discussed illness prevention" (4.72 vs. 4.29, p=0.0232). Due to a lack of necessary information from our national commercial outpatient clinic survey responses provided by the hospital, a direct comparison between the in-person survey and our national commercial outpatient clinic survey was not made.

conclusionsPatient satisfaction surveys when not given in real-time in-person run the risk of low response rate and lack of specifics to help guide providers in quality improvement. Our data supports the use of real-time in-person patient satisfaction surveys that not only increase response rate but also provide useful information to help improve patient experience.

Indexed as

neuro-surgeryoutpatient clinicpatient satisfaction scorequality improvement researchsurvey

Identifiers

PMID38435893
PMCPMC10907051
OpenAlexW4391308588

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.