Premium
Measuring patient satisfaction with anaesthesia: perioperative questionnaire versus standardised face‐to‐face interview
Author(s) -
Bauer M.,
Böhrer H.,
Aichele G.,
Bach A.,
Martin E.
Publication year - 2001
Publication title -
acta anaesthesiologica scandinavica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.738
H-Index - 107
eISSN - 1399-6576
pISSN - 0001-5172
DOI - 10.1034/j.1399-6576.2001.450111.x
Subject(s) - medicine , patient satisfaction , general anaesthesia , cronbach's alpha , perioperative , anesthesia , interview , physical therapy , surgery , psychometrics , clinical psychology , political science , law
Background: Patient satisfaction represents an essential part of quality management. Measuring the degree of patient satisfaction can be achieved with a variety of tools such as postoperative visits and patient questionnaires. The primary aim of this study was to quantify the degree of patient satisfaction with anaesthesia. A secondary aim was to compare the questionnaire technique with standardised face‐to‐face interviewing. Methods: The authors prospectively studied 700 patients on the second postoperative day. Patients were randomised and allocated to complete either a written questionnaire or to answer the same questions during a standardised face‐to‐face interview. The questionnaire was subdivided into a set of questions on anaesthesia‐related discomfort and another set on satisfaction with anaesthesia care in general. The questions on discomfort were assessed on a 3‐point scale, and those on patient satisfaction on a 4‐point scale. Results: Response rate was 84% (589 of 700 patients). Internal consistency, as measured by Cronbach’s α, was 0.84. When evaluating the questions on anaesthesia‐related discomfort, the most frequent sensations were “drowsiness” (>75%), “pain at the surgical site” (>55%), and “thirst” (>50%). The data on patient satisfaction showed a high degree of satisfaction (>90%). The responses to questions on anaesthesia‐related discomfort revealed only minor differences between the questionnaire and the face‐to‐face interview. The questions on satisfaction with anaesthesia, however, were answered consistently in a more critical manner during the interview ( P <0.0001). Conclusions: The standardised interview may be more suited to determine patient satisfaction than a questionnaire. Quality improvements are possible for emergence from anaesthesia, postoperative pain therapy, and the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting.