Epilogue
Early Lessons From CAHPSTM Demonstrations and Evaluations
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9102852 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kristin L Carman (corresponding author), Pamela Farley Short, Donna O Farley (RAND Corporation), Jenny A Schnaier, Diana B Elliott, Patricia M Gallagher (0000-0001-9844-8978) |
| Year | 1999 |
| Volume | 37 |
| Issue | SUPPLEMENT |
| Pages | MS97-MS115 |
| Publication date | 1999-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Medical Care (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0025-7079 • E-ISSN: 1537-1948 |
| Publisher | Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1097/00005650-199903001-00011 |
| OpenAlex | W2008968158 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
Objectives. The Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPSTM) was developed to provide an integrated set of tested, standardized surveys to obtain meaningful information from health plan enrollees and their experiences. Many organizations began to implement CAHPSTM in 1997. Formal evaluations of the experiences of three demonstration sites with implementing CAHPSTM (ie, process evaluations) and the impact of CAHPSTM on consumer's choices (ie, outcome evaluations) were conducted. This article reports on the early findings and feedback from our process evaluations about the sites' experiences with using CAHPSTM. Results are presented from the first round demonstration sites, including the lessons learned during the demonstrations. Our plans for future demonstrations and evaluations are included. Methods. A similar evaluation design and instruments were used across demonstration sites. The process evaluation to monitor program intervention included on-site interviews, off-site review of documents, and focus groups with consumers. Results. There are 4 early results from the CAHPSTM demonstrations: (1) the CAHPSTM survey covers topics of importance to sponsors, is of reasonable length, and can be administered quickly; (2) the report templates are being used effectively, but sponsors vary widely in their preferences for summarizing and presenting CAHPSTM ratings; (3) standardized or off-the-shelf products are aspects of CAHPSTM that sponsors value highly, while emphasizing need for further development; and (4) because surveys like CAHPSTM require multiple within-plan samples to make plan comparisons, they require a substantial investment and may be affordable only for large sponsors. Conclusion. The first round CAHPSTM demonstrations highlighted the strengths of the integrated surveys and the areas for improving the products and the implementation process
Business · Economics · Health care · Health plan · Patient experience · Plan (archaeology) · Set (abstract data type) · Computer Science · Healthcare Policy and Management · Marketing · Medicine · Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare · Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
The PedsQLTM* 4.0 as a Pediatric Population Health Measure
The PedsQLTM 4.0 as a School Population Health Measure
Do patient experiences on priority aspects of health care predict their global rating of quality of care? A study in five patient groups
Consumer Responses to Health Plan Report Cards in Two Markets
The Use of Cognitive Testing to Develop and Evaluate CAHPSTM 1.0 Core Survey Items
| Unique citing works | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,19 |
| Citation span | 1999 - 2010 (12) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |