Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
- Bachelor Thesis (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (5)
Keywords
- Patient (5) (remove)
Hintergrund:
Feedback von Patienten über erlebte Versorgungsaspekte erfolgt auch in der Rehabilitation inzwischen zunehmend online, beispielsweise auf Bewertungsportalen. Daher soll untersucht werden, welche von Rehabilitanden auf der für Reha-Kliniken führenden Bewertungsplattform Klinikbewertungen.de veröffentlichten Versorgungsaspekte mit der Weiterempfehlung einer Rehaklinik und welche negativen Aspekte mit der Nicht-Weiterempfehlung assoziiert sind.
Methode:
Eingeschlossen wurden Reha-Kliniken der Rentenversicherung Bund und federführend von ihr belegte Kliniken. Mit einem Mixed-Methods-Ansatz wurden aus acht Reha-Indikationsgruppen nach Zufriedenheitsstufen stratifizierte freitextliche Erfahrungsberichte von Rehabilitanden inhaltsanalytisch ausgewertet. Der Zusammenhang zwischen positiven (negativen) Aussagen mit der (Nicht-)Weiterempfehlung wurde in der jeweiligen Reha-Indikationsgruppe untersucht.
Ergebnisse:
Die Inhaltsanalyse von 911 Erfahrungsberichten ergab 20 thematische Kategorien. Der von Rehabilitanden wahrgenommene "Reha-Erfolg" war am häufigsten mit der Weiterempfehlung bzw. Nicht-Weiterempfehlung signifikant assoziiert. In fünf QS-Vergleichsgruppen war das Thema "Verpflegung" assoziiert. In allen QS-Vergleichsgruppen war mindestens ein prozessorientiertes Rehabilitationsthema assoziiert: "Reha-Maßnahmen", "Reha-Plan und Reha-Ziele" und/oder "Diagnose bis Entlassung".
Diskussion und Schlussfolgerung:
Reha-Kliniken können auf Basis der vorgestellten Ergebnisse indikationsspezifisch die für die Klinik-Weiterempfehlung relevanten Versorgungsaspekte identifizieren. Die Einbeziehung von Online-Erfahrungsberichten schafft zusätzliche Erkenntnisse über die Gründe der (Un-)Zufriedenheit von Rehabilitanden. Potenziellen Rehabilitanden steht das Erfahrungswissen als niederschwellige Informationsquelle und Entscheidungshilfe zur Verfügung
Background: Patient satisfaction is considered as an indicator of the healthcare quality. Information on patient satisfaction based on medical expertise of the physician, interpersonal skills, physician-patient interaction time, perception and needs of the patient allow policymakers to identify areas for improvement. Primary care services and healthcare structure differ between the countries. The present study was done to determine and analyze the determinants associated with patient satisfaction in India, Pakistan, Spain and USA.
Methods: This descriptive study was performed in January to August 2019 among students from Mumbai University, India, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan, University CEU Cardenal Herrera, Valencia, Spain, Texas State University, Texas, USA. On the basis of the eligibility criterion (those who gave a written informed consent and were registered students of respective university) 890 (India: 369, Pakistan: 128, Spain: 195, USA: 99) students were selected for the present study.
Results: India had almost similar male (49%) to female (51%) ratio of participants. For other 3 countries (PK, ES, US), female participant percentage was nearly 20% or even more as compared to male participants. Overall participant’s satisfaction score about medial expertise of the doctor were highest in India (71%) and were lowest in Spain (43%). Overall satisfaction score about time spent with doctor were highest for India (64%) and were lowest for Spain (41%). Overall satisfaction score about communication with doctor were highest for US (60%) and were lowest for PK (53%). Overall satisfaction score for medical care given by the doctor was lowest in PK (43%) and was highest in US (64%). Overall satisfaction about doctor, highest number of US (83%) and lowest number of PK (32%) participants were satisfied about medical interaction with doctors.
Conclusions: These multi-country findings can provide information for health policy making in India, Pakistan, Spain and USA. Although the average satisfaction per country, except Pakistan is more than 60%, the results suggest that there is ample room for improvement.
Objective: The study’s objective was to assess factors contributing to the use of smart devices by general practitioners (GPs) and patients in the health domain, while specifically addressing the situation in Germany, and to determine whether, and if so, how both groups differ in their perceptions of these technologies.
Methods: GPs and patients of resident practices in the Hannover region, Germany, were surveyed between April and June 2014. A total of 412 GPs in this region were invited by email to participate via an electronic survey, with 50 GPs actually doing so (response rate 12.1%). For surveying the patients, eight regional resident practices were visited by study personnel (once each). Every second patient arriving there (inclusion criteria: of age, fluent in German) was asked to take part (paper-based questionnaire). One hundred and seventy patients participated; 15 patients who did not give consent were excluded.
Results: The majority of the participating patients (68.2%, 116/170) and GPs (76%, 38/50) owned mobile devices. Of the patients, 49.9% (57/116) already made health-related use of mobile devices; 95% (36/38) of the participating GPs used them in a professional context. For patients, age (P<0.001) and education (P<0.001) were significant factors, but not gender (P>0.99). For doctors, neither age (P¼0.73), professional experience (P>0.99) nor gender (P¼0.19) influenced usage rates. For patients, the primary use case was obtaining health (service)-related information. For GPs, interprofessional communication and retrieving information were in the foreground. There was little app-related interaction between both groups.
Conclusions: GPs and patients use smart mobile devices to serve their specific interests. However, the full potentials of mobile technologies for health purposes are not yet being taken advantage of. Doctors as well as other care providers and the patients should work together on exploring and realising the potential benefits of the technology.
Objective
The study’s objective was to assess factors contributing to the use of smart devices by general practitioners (GPs) and patients in the health domain, while specifically addressing the situation in Germany, and to determine whether, and if so, how both groups differ in their perceptions of these technologies.
Methods
GPs and patients of resident practices in the Hannover region, Germany, were surveyed between April and June 2014. A total of 412 GPs in this region were invited by email to participate via an electronic survey, with 50 GPs actually doing so (response rate 12.1%). For surveying the patients, eight regional resident practices were visited by study personnel (once each). Every second patient arriving there (inclusion criteria: of age, fluent in German) was asked to take part (paper-based questionnaire). One hundred and seventy patients participated; 15 patients who did not give consent were excluded.
Results
The majority of the participating patients (68.2%, 116/170) and GPs (76%, 38/50) owned mobile devices. Of the patients, 49.9% (57/116) already made health-related use of mobile devices; 95% (36/38) of the participating GPs used them in a professional context. For patients, age (P < 0.001) and education (P < 0.001) were significant factors, but not gender (P > 0.99). For doctors, neither age (P = 0.73), professional experience (P > 0.99) nor gender (P = 0.19) influenced usage rates. For patients, the primary use case was obtaining health (service)-related information. For GPs, interprofessional communication and retrieving information were in the foreground. There was little app-related interaction between both groups.
Conclusions
GPs and patients use smart mobile devices to serve their specific interests. However, the full potentials of mobile technologies for health purposes are not yet being taken advantage of. Doctors as well as other care providers and the patients should work together on exploring and realising the potential benefits of the technology.