Assessing patients' expectations in ambulatory medical practice

Does the measurement approach make a difference?

Richard L Kravitz, Edward J Callahan, Rahman Azari, Deirdre Antonius, Charles E. Lewis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

50 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To compare three different approaches to the measurement of patients' expectations for care, we conducted a randomized controlled trial. Medical outpatients (n = 318) of a small (six-physician), single-specialty (internal medicine), academically affiliated private practice in Sacramento, California, were contacted by telephone the night before a scheduled of rice visit and enrolled over a 5-month period in early 1994. Patients were randomly assigned to receive: (1) a self-administered, structured, previsit questionnaire combined with a postvisit questionnaire; (2) an interviewer- administered, semistructured, previsit interview combined with a postvisit questionnaire; or (3) a postvisit questionnaire only. We assessed the number and content of patients' expectations by previsit questionnaire versus interview; the interaction between sociodemographic characteristics and survey method in predicting number of reported expectations; the effect of unfulfilled expectations elicited by questionnaire and interview on visit satisfaction; and the effect of unfulfilled expectations elicited directly and indirectly on visit satisfaction. Patients reported more expectations by structured questionnaire than semistructured interview (median 12 vs 3, p = .0001). Although there was no main effect of sociodemographic characteristics on expectations, nonwhite patients reported more expectations than white patients by questionnaire and fewer by interview. The number of interventions desired before the visit but not received (indirectly reported unfulfilled expectations) was associated with lower visit satisfaction regardless of whether a questionnaire or interview was used to elicit previsit expectations (p value for the interaction between number of expectations and survey method, > .20). Having more indirectly reported unfulfilled expectations was significantly associated with lower visit satisfaction even after controlling for the number of directly reported unfulfilled expectations (p = .021), but the incremental change in classification accuracy was small (increase in receiver-operating characteristic curve area, 3%). In conclusion, studies of patients' expectations for care must contend with a substantial 'method effect.' In this study from a single group practice, patients checked off more expectations using a structured questionnaire than they disclosed in a semistructured interview, but both formats predicted visit satisfaction. Asking patients about interventions received in relation to their previsit expectations added little to simply asking them directly about omitted care. The interaction of survey method with ethnicity and other sociodemographic characteristics requires further study.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)67-72
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of General Internal Medicine
Volume12
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 1997

Fingerprint

Interviews
Surveys and Questionnaires
Patient Care
Group Practice
Private Practice
Internal Medicine
Telephone
ROC Curve
Outpatients
Randomized Controlled Trials
Physicians

Keywords

  • office practice
  • patients' expectations
  • randomized controlled trial
  • survey techniques

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Assessing patients' expectations in ambulatory medical practice : Does the measurement approach make a difference? / Kravitz, Richard L; Callahan, Edward J; Azari, Rahman; Antonius, Deirdre; Lewis, Charles E.

In: Journal of General Internal Medicine, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1997, p. 67-72.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{be8ae2200f4542deb031b754ee146454,
title = "Assessing patients' expectations in ambulatory medical practice: Does the measurement approach make a difference?",
abstract = "To compare three different approaches to the measurement of patients' expectations for care, we conducted a randomized controlled trial. Medical outpatients (n = 318) of a small (six-physician), single-specialty (internal medicine), academically affiliated private practice in Sacramento, California, were contacted by telephone the night before a scheduled of rice visit and enrolled over a 5-month period in early 1994. Patients were randomly assigned to receive: (1) a self-administered, structured, previsit questionnaire combined with a postvisit questionnaire; (2) an interviewer- administered, semistructured, previsit interview combined with a postvisit questionnaire; or (3) a postvisit questionnaire only. We assessed the number and content of patients' expectations by previsit questionnaire versus interview; the interaction between sociodemographic characteristics and survey method in predicting number of reported expectations; the effect of unfulfilled expectations elicited by questionnaire and interview on visit satisfaction; and the effect of unfulfilled expectations elicited directly and indirectly on visit satisfaction. Patients reported more expectations by structured questionnaire than semistructured interview (median 12 vs 3, p = .0001). Although there was no main effect of sociodemographic characteristics on expectations, nonwhite patients reported more expectations than white patients by questionnaire and fewer by interview. The number of interventions desired before the visit but not received (indirectly reported unfulfilled expectations) was associated with lower visit satisfaction regardless of whether a questionnaire or interview was used to elicit previsit expectations (p value for the interaction between number of expectations and survey method, > .20). Having more indirectly reported unfulfilled expectations was significantly associated with lower visit satisfaction even after controlling for the number of directly reported unfulfilled expectations (p = .021), but the incremental change in classification accuracy was small (increase in receiver-operating characteristic curve area, 3{\%}). In conclusion, studies of patients' expectations for care must contend with a substantial 'method effect.' In this study from a single group practice, patients checked off more expectations using a structured questionnaire than they disclosed in a semistructured interview, but both formats predicted visit satisfaction. Asking patients about interventions received in relation to their previsit expectations added little to simply asking them directly about omitted care. The interaction of survey method with ethnicity and other sociodemographic characteristics requires further study.",
keywords = "office practice, patients' expectations, randomized controlled trial, survey techniques",
author = "Kravitz, {Richard L} and Callahan, {Edward J} and Rahman Azari and Deirdre Antonius and Lewis, {Charles E.}",
year = "1997",
doi = "10.1007/s11606-006-0010-6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
pages = "67--72",
journal = "Journal of General Internal Medicine",
issn = "0884-8734",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessing patients' expectations in ambulatory medical practice

T2 - Does the measurement approach make a difference?

AU - Kravitz, Richard L

AU - Callahan, Edward J

AU - Azari, Rahman

AU - Antonius, Deirdre

AU - Lewis, Charles E.

PY - 1997

Y1 - 1997

N2 - To compare three different approaches to the measurement of patients' expectations for care, we conducted a randomized controlled trial. Medical outpatients (n = 318) of a small (six-physician), single-specialty (internal medicine), academically affiliated private practice in Sacramento, California, were contacted by telephone the night before a scheduled of rice visit and enrolled over a 5-month period in early 1994. Patients were randomly assigned to receive: (1) a self-administered, structured, previsit questionnaire combined with a postvisit questionnaire; (2) an interviewer- administered, semistructured, previsit interview combined with a postvisit questionnaire; or (3) a postvisit questionnaire only. We assessed the number and content of patients' expectations by previsit questionnaire versus interview; the interaction between sociodemographic characteristics and survey method in predicting number of reported expectations; the effect of unfulfilled expectations elicited by questionnaire and interview on visit satisfaction; and the effect of unfulfilled expectations elicited directly and indirectly on visit satisfaction. Patients reported more expectations by structured questionnaire than semistructured interview (median 12 vs 3, p = .0001). Although there was no main effect of sociodemographic characteristics on expectations, nonwhite patients reported more expectations than white patients by questionnaire and fewer by interview. The number of interventions desired before the visit but not received (indirectly reported unfulfilled expectations) was associated with lower visit satisfaction regardless of whether a questionnaire or interview was used to elicit previsit expectations (p value for the interaction between number of expectations and survey method, > .20). Having more indirectly reported unfulfilled expectations was significantly associated with lower visit satisfaction even after controlling for the number of directly reported unfulfilled expectations (p = .021), but the incremental change in classification accuracy was small (increase in receiver-operating characteristic curve area, 3%). In conclusion, studies of patients' expectations for care must contend with a substantial 'method effect.' In this study from a single group practice, patients checked off more expectations using a structured questionnaire than they disclosed in a semistructured interview, but both formats predicted visit satisfaction. Asking patients about interventions received in relation to their previsit expectations added little to simply asking them directly about omitted care. The interaction of survey method with ethnicity and other sociodemographic characteristics requires further study.

AB - To compare three different approaches to the measurement of patients' expectations for care, we conducted a randomized controlled trial. Medical outpatients (n = 318) of a small (six-physician), single-specialty (internal medicine), academically affiliated private practice in Sacramento, California, were contacted by telephone the night before a scheduled of rice visit and enrolled over a 5-month period in early 1994. Patients were randomly assigned to receive: (1) a self-administered, structured, previsit questionnaire combined with a postvisit questionnaire; (2) an interviewer- administered, semistructured, previsit interview combined with a postvisit questionnaire; or (3) a postvisit questionnaire only. We assessed the number and content of patients' expectations by previsit questionnaire versus interview; the interaction between sociodemographic characteristics and survey method in predicting number of reported expectations; the effect of unfulfilled expectations elicited by questionnaire and interview on visit satisfaction; and the effect of unfulfilled expectations elicited directly and indirectly on visit satisfaction. Patients reported more expectations by structured questionnaire than semistructured interview (median 12 vs 3, p = .0001). Although there was no main effect of sociodemographic characteristics on expectations, nonwhite patients reported more expectations than white patients by questionnaire and fewer by interview. The number of interventions desired before the visit but not received (indirectly reported unfulfilled expectations) was associated with lower visit satisfaction regardless of whether a questionnaire or interview was used to elicit previsit expectations (p value for the interaction between number of expectations and survey method, > .20). Having more indirectly reported unfulfilled expectations was significantly associated with lower visit satisfaction even after controlling for the number of directly reported unfulfilled expectations (p = .021), but the incremental change in classification accuracy was small (increase in receiver-operating characteristic curve area, 3%). In conclusion, studies of patients' expectations for care must contend with a substantial 'method effect.' In this study from a single group practice, patients checked off more expectations using a structured questionnaire than they disclosed in a semistructured interview, but both formats predicted visit satisfaction. Asking patients about interventions received in relation to their previsit expectations added little to simply asking them directly about omitted care. The interaction of survey method with ethnicity and other sociodemographic characteristics requires further study.

KW - office practice

KW - patients' expectations

KW - randomized controlled trial

KW - survey techniques

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031050406&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031050406&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11606-006-0010-6

DO - 10.1007/s11606-006-0010-6

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 67

EP - 72

JO - Journal of General Internal Medicine

JF - Journal of General Internal Medicine

SN - 0884-8734

IS - 1

ER -