Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia

, 48:1127 | Cite as

Patients’ perceptions of cardiac anesthesia services: a pilot study

  • Sylvie Le MayEmail author
  • Jean-François Hardy
  • François Harel
  • Marie-Christine Taillefer
  • Gilles Dupuis
Cardiothoracic Anesthesia, Respiration and Airway

Abstract

Purpose

To develop an instrument to measure patients’ perceptions of the services provided by anesthesiologists, an important indicator of quality for which little information is available.

Methods

The scale of patients’ perceptions of cardiac anesthesia services (SOPPCAS) is composed of 17 Likert-type and sociodemographic questions. Data collection was conducted on T-1 (fourth postoperative day) and T-2 (15 days postoperatively). In addition, we employed the Marlow-Crowne scale and a short form of the Psychological Symptoms Index to verify the influence of social desirability and psychological distress respectively. Data analysis included a principal component analysis (PCA).

Results

One hundred seventy patients answered the questionnaires at T-1 and 133 patients at T-2. Cronbach alpha of the SOPPCAS was 0.58. PCA revealed four perioperative factors: patient/anesthesiologist interactions, preoccupations related to anesthesia, experience with anesthesia and pain management. Global mean satisfaction was 4.45 ± 0.64 (maximum score 6.0). Main items related to satisfaction were: satisfaction with premedication, empathy from anesthesiologists, pain management. Main items related to dissatisfaction were: lack of information on blood transfusion and recall of endotracheal intubation. A score of 14/20 was obtained for social desirability. Social desirability did not influence the construct of the SOPPCAS.

Conclusion

We developed, using rigorous methods, an instrument to measure patients’ perceptions of the quality of cardiac anesthesia services. Global mean satisfaction with anesthesia services was moderately high contrary to previous studies where it was high. Finally, the SOPPCAS should allow anesthesiologists to improve the quality of the care they provide.

Keywords

Psychological Distress Patient Satisfaction Pain Management Anaesth Intensive Main Item 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Les perceptions de patients sur l’anesthésie cardiaque: une étude pilote

Résumé

Objectif

Présenter un nouvel instrument de mesure des perceptions de patients en regard de la qualité des services anesthésiques, un indicateur important de la qualité pour lequel peu d’informations sont disponibles.

Méthode

L’échelle des perceptions de patients face aux services anesthésiques cardiaques (EPPAC) est composée de 17 items Likert et de questions sociodémographiques. La collecte de données s’est déroulée en deux temps: T-1 (quatrième jour postopératoire) et T-2 (15e jour postopératoire, par la poste). De plus, l’échelle de Marlow-Crowne et une forme abrégée du Psychological Symptoms Index ont été utilisées pour vérifer la désirabilité sociale et la détresse psychologique. L’analyse statistique comprenait une analyse en composantes principales (ACP).

Résultats

Cent soixantedix patients ont répondu à T-1 et 133 patients à T-2. L’alpha de Cronbach de l’EPPAC était de 0,58. L’ACP a révélé la présence de quatre facteurs: interactions patient/anesthésiologiste, préoccupations reliées à l’anesthésie, expérience de l’anesthésie, gestion de la douleur. La moyenne globale de satisfaction était 4,45 ± 0,64. Les aspects satisfaisants étaient: satisfaction face à la prémédication, empathie de l’anesthésiologiste, gestion de la douleur. Les aspects insatisfaisants étaient: manque d’information sur les transfusions sanguines et souvenir de l’intubation endotrachéale. Un score de 14/20 a été obtenu au Marlow-Crowne mais la désirabilité sociale n’influençait pas la validité de construit de l’EPPAC.

Conclusion

Utilisant une méthodologie rigoureuse, nous avons mis au point un instrument de mesure des perceptions de patients en regard de la qualité des services anesthésiques cardiaques. Contrairement aux résultats des études antérieures, la satisfaction globale moyenne n’était que modérément élevée. Finalement, l’EPPAC devrait permettre aux anesthésiologistes d’améliorer la qualité des services qu’ils offrent.

References

  1. 1.
    Carr-Hill RA. The measurement of patient satisfaction. J Publ Health Med 1992; 14: 236–49.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Linder-Pelz S. Toward a theory of patient satisfaction. Soc Sci Med 1982; 16: 577–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Locker D, Dunt D. Theoretical and methodological issues in sociological studies of consumer satisfaction with medical care. Soc Sci Med 1978; 12: 283–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Omachonu VK. Quality of care and the patient: new criteria for evaluation. Health Care Manag Rev 1990; 15: 43–50.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Akinsaya J, Cox G, Crouch C, Fletcher L. The Roy adaptation: model in action.In: Price B (Ed.). Nursing Models in Action. London, UK: The Macmillan Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Iezzoni LI. Risk Adjustment for Measuring Health Care Outcomes. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Health Administration Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee A, Lum ME. Measuring anaesthetic outcomes. Anaesth Intensive Care 1996; 24: 685–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Whitty PM, Shaw IH, Goodwin DR Patient satisfaction with general anaesthesia. Too difficult to measure? Anaesthesia 1996; 51: 327–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Le May S, Hardy J-F, Taillefer M-C, Dupuis G. Patient satisfaction with anesthesia services. Can J Anesth 2001; 48: 153–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pestey ME. Patient satisfaction with the anesthesia services delivered in the cost containment atmosphere of healthcare today. Unpublished master thesis. New Haven, Connecticut: Southern Connecticut State University, 1992.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Strasser S, Davis RM. Measuring patient satisfaction for improved patient services. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Health Administration Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Strahan R, Gerbasi KC Short, homogenous versions of the Marlow-Crowne social desirability scale. J Clin Psychology 1972; 28: 191–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cloutier J. La désirabilité sociale chez les agresseurs sexuels. Mémoire de maîtrise inédit en psychologie. Faculté des Arts et Sciences, Université de Montréal, 1993.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ilfeld FW Jr. Further validation of a psychiatric symptom index in a normal population. Psychological Reports 1976; 39: 1215–28.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bibeau L. Prevalence and associations of body image disorder perfectionism and suicidal ideation in a student population. Unpublished doctoral thesis in psychology, Université du Québec à Montréal, 1998.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brown DL, Warner ME, Schroeder DR, Offord KP. Effect of intraoperative anesthetic events on postoperative patient satisfaction. Mayo Clin Proc 1997; 72: 20–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Preble LM, Perlstein L, Katsoff-Seidman L, O’Connor TZ, Barash PG. The patient care evaluation system: patients’ perceptions of anesthetic care. Connecticut Med 1993; 57: 363–6.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zvara DA, Nelson JM, Brooker RF, et al. The importance of the postoperative anesthetic visit: do repeated visits improve patient satisfaction or physician recognition? Anesth Analg 1996; 83: 793–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Keep PJ, Jenkins JR From the other end of the needle. The patient’s experience of routine anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 1978; 33: 830–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fong D, Chung F, Wong D. Predictive factors in global and anesthesia satisfaction in ambulatory surgical patients. Anesthesiology 1997; 87: 856–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dexter F, Aker J, Wright WA. Development of a measure of patient satisfaction with monitored anesthesia care. Anesthesiology 1997; 87: 865–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Penon C, Ecoffey C. Evaluation par les patients de la qualité de la prise en charge anesthésique. Ann Fr Anesth Réanim 1995; 14: 374–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Burrow BJ. The patient’s view of anaesthesia in an Australian teaching hospital. Anaesth Intensive Care 1982; 10: 20–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dodds CP, Harding MI, More DG Anaesthesia in an Australian private hospital: the consumer’s view. Anaesth Intensive Care 1985; 13: 325–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shevde K, Panagopoulos G. A survey of 800 patients’ knowledge, attitudes, and concerns regarding anesthesia. Anesth Analg 1991; 73: 190–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fleisher LA, Mark L, Lam J, et al. Disseminating information using an anesthesiology consultant report: impact on patient perceptions of quality of care. J Clin Anesth 1999; 11: 380–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Myles PS, Williams DL, Hendrata M, Anderson H, Weeks AM. Patient satisfaction after anaesthesia and surgery: results of a prospective survey of 10 811 patients. Br J Anaesth 2000; 84: 6–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Le May S, Hardy J-F, Taillefer M-C, Dupuis G. Inappropriate methods for patient satisfaction (Letter). Br JAnaesth 2000; 84: 821.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    DeVellis RF. Scale Development. Theory and Applications. London, UK: Sage Publications, 1991.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales. A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use, 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kopp VJ, Shafer A. Anesthesiologists and perioperative communication. Anesthesiology 2000; 93: 548–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lips HM. Sex and Gender. An Introduction, 2nd ed., Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company, 1997.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nathanson CA Illness and the feminine role: a theoretical review. Soc Sci Med 1975; 9: 57–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kandrack M-A, Grant KR, Segall A. Gender differences in health related behaviour: some unanswered questions. Soc Sci Med 1991; 32: 579–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kring AM, Gordon AH Sex differences in emotion: expression, experience, and physiology. J Pers Soc Psych 1998; 74: 686–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gross JJ, John OP. Mapping the domain of expressivity: multimethod evidence for a hierarchical model. J Pers Soc Psychol 1998; 74: 170–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Williams B. Patient satisfaction: a valid concept? Soc Sci Med 1994; 38: 509–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Macario A, Weinger M, Carney S, Kim A Which clinical anesthesia outcomes are important to avoid? The perspective of patients. Anesth Analg 1999; 89: 652–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Powers J. A sedation protocol for preventing patient self-extubation. Dimens Crit Care Nurs 1999; 18: 30–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lester GW, Smith SG. Listening and talking to patients. A remedy for malpractice suits? Western J Med 1993; 158: 268–72.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Canadian Anesthesiologists 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sylvie Le May
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jean-François Hardy
    • 2
  • François Harel
    • 3
  • Marie-Christine Taillefer
    • 4
  • Gilles Dupuis
    • 4
  1. 1.Faculty of NursingUniversity of MontrealMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Department of AnesthesiologyUniversity of MontrealMontrealCanada
  3. 3.Department of BiostatisticsMontreal Heart InstituteMontrealCanada
  4. 4.Department of PsychologyUniversité du Québec à MontréalMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations