Choosing a Hospital for Surgery: The Importance of Information on Quality of Care

Author:

Dijs-Elsinga Joyce1,Otten Wilma1,Versluijs Martine M.2,Smeets Harm J.3,Kievit Job4,Vree Robbert5,van der Made Wendeline J.6,Marang-van de Mheen Perla J.7

Affiliation:

1. Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands

2. Federation of Patients and Consumer Organisations in the Netherlands, Utrecht, The Netherlands

3. Department of Surgery, Bronovo Hospital, The Hague, The Netherlands

4. Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands, Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands

5. Department of Surgery, Diaconessenhuis Leiden, The Netherlands

6. Department of Surgery Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands

7. Received 26 June 2009 from the Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands,

Abstract

Objective. To assess whether patients use information on quality of care when choosing a hospital for surgery compared with more general hospital information. Methods. In this cross-sectional study in 3 Dutch hospitals, questionnaires were sent to 2122 patients who underwent 1 of 6 elective surgical procedures in 2005—2006 (aorta reconstruction [for treatment of aneurysm], cholecystectomy, colon resection, inguinal hernia repair, esophageal resection, thyroid surgery). Patients were asked which information they had used to choose this hospital and which information they intended to use if they would need similar surgical treatment in the future. Results. In total, 1329 questionnaires were available for analysis (response rate 62.6%). Most patients indicated having used the hospital’s good reputation (69.1%) and friendly hospital atmosphere (63.3%) to choose a hospital. For future choices, most patients intended to use the fact that they were already treated in that hospital (79.3%) and the hospital’s good reputation (74.1%). Regarding quality-of-care information, patients preferred a summary measure (% patients with ‘‘textbook outcome’’) over separate more detailed measures (52.1% v. 38.0%, χ2 = 291, P < 0.01). For future choices, patients intend to use more information items than in 2005—2006, both in absolute terms (9 v. 4 items, t = 38.3, P < 0.01) as relative to the total number of available items (41.3% [40.1%—42.5%] v. 29.2% [28.1%—30.2%]). Conclusion. Patients intended to use more information for future choices than they used for past choices. For future choices, most patients prefer a summary measure on quality of care over more detailed measures but seem to value that they were already treated in that hospital or a hospital’s good reputation even more.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Policy

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