Skip Navigation

International Journal for Quality in Health Care 2004 16(6):433-435; doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzh090
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Perneger, T. V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Perneger, T. V.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal for Quality in Health Care vol. 16 no. 6 © International Society for Quality in Health Care and Oxford University Press 2004; all rights reserved

Editorial

Adjustment for patient characteristics in satisfaction surveys

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

The ideal quality indicator measures a specific aspect of the quality of health care and nothing else. Unfortunately, this is often not the case, particularly for outcome indicators, which often reflect a variety of patient characteristics that are not under the provider’s control. Take patient satisfaction surveys: we all know of grumpy patients who complain even when they receive the best care, and of patients who are thankful and uncomplaining even in the worst conditions. Comparisons of mean satisfaction scores between health care providers who do not serve the same profile of patient population may be biased. Unadjusted results of satisfaction surveys are often mistrusted by providers, particularly those who fare poorly in comparison with others, and are therefore not used to improve care.

Current practice

A . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Detailed model

Socio-demographic characteristics

Health status and health care

Ratings and reports

Conclusion

Thomas V. Perneger

Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland and Quality of Care Unit, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Qual Saf Health CareHome page
T Agoritsas, A Lubbeke, L Schiesari, and T V Perneger
Assessment of patients' tendency to give a positive or negative rating to healthcare
Qual. Saf. Health Care, October 1, 2009; 18(5): 374 - 379.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Int J Qual Health CareHome page
S. Antoniotti, K. Baumstarck-Barrau, M.-C. Simeoni, C. Sapin, J. Labarere, L. Gerbaud, L. Boyer, C. Colin, P. Francois, and P. Auquier
Validation of a French hospitalized patients' satisfaction questionnaire: the QSH-45
Int. J. Qual. Health Care, August 1, 2009; 21(4): 243 - 252.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Fam PractHome page
A. Busato, A. Donges, S. Herren, M. Widmer, and F. Marian
Health status and health care utilisation of patients in complementary and conventional primary care in Switzerland--an observational study
Fam. Pract., February 1, 2006; 23(1): 116 - 124.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]