Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39503918›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2024

Australian private healthcare staff perspectives on patient reported experience measures (PREMs): a qualitative interview study.

Krista Verlis, Kirsten McCaffery, Tessa Copp, Rachael Dodd, Brooke Nickel, Rebekah Laidsaar-Powell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 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
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  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.

Krista VerlisSydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. krista.verlis@sydney.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-2139-1640
Kirsten McCafferySydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Tessa CoppSydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Rachael DoddSydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Brooke NickelSydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Rebekah Laidsaar-PowellSydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

Medibank Better Health Foundation Medibank Better Health Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePatient reported experience measures (PREMs) are common tools utilised in hospitals to support quality improvements, allow consumers to provide feedback on care experiences and can be used to support consumers' hospital selections. This study aimed to understand the views and opinions of private hospital staff on PREM use and the utility of PREMs as a consumer decision-making tool.

methodQualitative, semi-structured interview study conducted via telephone between March-June 2023. Participants (n = 10) were recruited from major private healthcare providers in Australia with half representing hospital-based staff and the other half corporate head office staff who work in patient experience and quality. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically.

resultsPREM benefits included an understanding of patient experience that improved provision of patient centred care with feedback acting as catalyst for change, to corporate-level strategic initiatives that address specific issues. Drawbacks of PREM reporting included concerns around skewed results by biased respondents, and completion based on hard to alter items (e.g., infrastructure) or on matters outside of hospital control (e.g., insurance). Staff had mixed reactions to consumers using PREMs results when selecting a hospital, some advocated for transparency while others feared consumers would misinterpret the data.

conclusionsImproved real-time reporting of PREMs, learning from other industries about recording customer experience, and mandatory reporting by private hospitals could further the benefits of PREM measurement in private healthcare. Recognised was the need for PREMs to be displayed in a readily understood way so those with limited health literacy can correctly interpret.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionQualitative ResearchAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelAustraliaFemaleHealth PersonnelHospitals, PrivateHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPatient-Centered CarePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality ImprovementDecision-makingHospital admissionHospital report cardsPatient reported experience measuresPrivate health insuranceQualitative

Identifiers

PMID39503918
PMCPMC11541965

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.