Patient Engagement: Tracking Patients Respiratory Care Experience Using a 5 Star Satisfaction Survey

Abstract

Background:

The experience between in-patients and the health care systems they access has become more troublesome. In-patients are sending a loud message which brings health care’s quality of care into question. How the patient feels about his or her care is a significant driver of whether or not they will promote and/or recommend a health care institution within their sphere of influence. Three strategies have been suggested to enrich the patient’s experience: 1) individualization of patients based on their values, needs and preferences, 2) timely information sharing between the patient and care provider, and 3) use survey instruments which invites the patients to provide feedback about their hospital experience which can be compared with patient experiences regionally and nationally[1]. At UCSF Health we send all former in-patients a survey to determine if they would recommend our services for medical care. Our medical system has set a satisfaction rating metric of > 60% return of “yes, I would recommend” UCSF Health for medical care. Respiratory Care Services (RCS) provides respiratory care across all areas of UCSF Health, historically our service has never had a method or specific tool to evaluate and monitor patient’s satisfaction associated with the care provide.

Methods:

In an effort to measure the impact of RCS on Patient Experience, we implemented a 5 star survey tool for patients who were assigned to a RCS Clinical Pathway. Patients were surveyed on their overall satisfaction with our service. In addition, we also surveyed if the patient would recommend UCSF Health for medical care.

Results:

During the first quarter of calendar year ’19 we surveyed a total 46 patients, representing all areas of acute and transitional in-patient care. Considering the University’s True North metric for recommendation ratability, we are using our survey as a sample size metric. Thus far our results have produced a 100% return rate of “yes, I (patient) would recommend UCSF Health”.

Conclusions:

This survey provided patients with a platform to provide real time feedback, which allows for timely intervention. Selecting patients in whom we provide respiratory care services, ensures that we hold ourselves accountable to the service that we provide. The survey also provides us with a tool to deliver timely recognition to respiratory care staff. Reference: [1] Brook RH, McGlynn EA, Cleary PD. Quality of health care. Part 2: measuring quality of care. N Engl J Med 1996; 335:966.