The validity and reliability of self-reported satisfaction with healthcare as a measure of quality: a systematic literature review

Author:

ANUFRIYEVA Valentyna12,PAVLOVA Milena1ORCID,STEPURKO Tetiana23,GROOT Wim14

Affiliation:

1. Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI, Maastricht University Medical Center, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands

2. Ukrainian-Swiss Project ‘Medical Education Development’, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Liuteranska street 6-b, apt. 43, Kyiv, Ukraine, 01001

3. School of Public Health, National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, Skovorody 2, Kyiv, Ukraine, 04655

4. Top Institute Evidence-Based Education Research (TIER), Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands

Abstract

Abstract Purpose The aim of this paper is to systematize the evidence on the validity and reliability of subjective measurements of satisfaction with healthcare. Data sources In this qualitative systematic literature review, we searched for relevant publications in PubMed and JSTOR databases. Study selection The key inclusion criteria included (i) original research articles in peer-reviewed journals, (ii) year of publication from 2008 onward and (iii) English language publications. Data extraction We applied directed qualitative content analysis to the publications included in the review. Results of data synthesis Overall, 1167 publications are found and screened. Of these, 39 publications that focus on the psychometric properties of the measurement of patient satisfaction are included. The majority of the studies validate the already existing instruments adapted to different contexts; the rest describe psychometric properties of self-developed tools. Psychometric properties are assessed by means of reliability and validity assessment. Reliability assessment is performed via Cronbach alpha and test–retest reliability. Overall, 94.9% of studies find that the satisfaction measures are reliable. Validation is performed by a variety of different methods, among which the most applicable are face validity and factor analysis. Overall, 71.8% of studies find that the satisfaction measures are valid. Conclusion Because of the complexity of the studies, we cannot make strong recommendations on the application of self-reported satisfaction measures. We recommend the following key strategies: (i) developing of a unified standard toward satisfaction measurement and (ii) identifying a combination of tools to routinely measure satisfaction. We also suggest to further research the issue of subjectivity reduction.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,General Medicine

Reference26 articles.

1. A critical review of patient satisfaction;Gill;Leadersh Health Serv,2009

2. Patient satisfaction: a review of issues and concepts;Sitzia;Soc Sci Med,1997

3. The sick role and the role of the physician reconsidered;Parsons;Milbank Mem Fund Q Health Soc,1975

4. Informed and shared decision-making: the crux of patient-centered care;Weston;CMAJ,2001

5. Consumer-driven, patient-centered health care in the age of electronic information;Calabretta;J Med Libr Assoc,2002

Cited by 14 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3