Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Feedback preferences of patients, professionals and health insurers in integrated head and neck cancer care

Bibliographic Data

ID19508328
AuthorsLydia F J van Overveld (0000-0002-8527-3686, Radboud University Medical Center Radboud Institute for Health Sciences Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare Nijmegen The Netherlands, corresponding author), Robert P Takes (0000-0003-4784-0499, Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck surgery Radboud University Medical Center Radboud Institute for Health Sciences Nijmegen The Netherlands), Thomas Willem Vijn (0000-0001-6834-7586, Radboud University Nijmegen), Jozé C C Braspenning (Radboud University Medical Center Radboud Institute for Health Sciences Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare Nijmegen The Netherlands), Jozé Braspenning (0000-0003-0800-0630, Radboud University Nijmegen), Jan Paul de Boer (0000-0001-6218-6128, The Netherlands Cancer Institute), John J A Brouns (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Rijnstate Hospital Arnhem The Netherlands), Rolf J Bun (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Medical Centre Alkmaar Alkmaar The Netherlands), Boukje A C van Dijk (0000-0001-5984-4716, Department of Research Comprehensive Cancer Organization the Netherlands (IKNL) Utrecht The Netherlands), Judith A W F Dortmans (Department of Radiation Oncology Medisch Spectrum Twente Enschede The Netherlands), Emilie A C Dronkers (0000-0003-1238-0613, Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck surgery Erasmus MC Cancer Institute Rotterdam The Netherlands), Robert J J van Es (0000-0002-4246-5899, Department of Head and Neck Surgical Oncology UMC Utrecht Cancer Center Utrecht The Netherlands), Frank J P Hoebers (Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO) GROW – School for Oncology and Developmental Biology Maastricht University Medical Centre Maastricht The Netherlands), Frank Hoebers (0000-0002-4317-9181, Maastricht University Medical Centre), Arvid Kropveld (Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck surgery Elisabeth‐TweeSteden ziekenhuis Tilburg Tilburg The Netherlands), Johannes A Langendijk (0000-0003-1083-372X, Department of Radiation Oncology University of Groningen University Medical Centre Groningen Groningen The Netherlands), Ton P M Langeveld (Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck surgery Leiden University Medical Centre Leiden The Netherlands), Sjoukje F Oosting (0000-0003-2754-6997, Department of Medical Oncology University of Groningen University Medical Centre Groningen Groningen The Netherlands), Hendrik P Verschuur (Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck surgery MC Haaglanden‐Bronovo The Hague The Netherlands), Jan G A M de Visscher (0000-0002-2789-9381, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Medical Centre Leeuwarden Leeuwarden The Netherlands), Stijn van Weert (0000-0002-7759-7461, Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck surgery VU University Medical Centre Amsterdam The Netherlands), Matthias A W Merkx (0000-0002-0687-9760, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Radboud university Medical Centre Radboud Institute for Health Sciences Nijmegen The Netherlands), Ludi E Smeele (0000-0002-9961-4760, Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Nederlands Kanker Instituut Amsterdam The Netherlands), Rosella Hermens (0000-0001-7624-7120, Radboud University Nijmegen), Rosella P M G Hermens (Radboud University Medical Center Radboud Institute for Health Sciences Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare Nijmegen The Netherlands)
Year2017
Volume20
Issue6
Pages1275-1288
Publication date2017-12-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueHealth Expectations (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1369-6513 • E-ISSN: 1369-7625
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/hex.12567
PMID28618147
OpenAlexW2624892666
LanguageEN
References cited39

BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes are the most often used interventions to change behaviour of professionals and improve quality of health care. However, limited information is available regarding preferred feedback for patients, professionals and health insurers. OBJECTIVE: Investigate the (differences in) preferences of receiving feedback between stakeholders, using the Dutch Head and Neck Audit as an example. METHODS: A total of 37 patients, medical specialists, allied health professionals and health insurers were interviewed using semi-structured interviews. Questions focussed on: "Why," "On what aspects" and "How" do you prefer to receive feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes? RESULTS: All stakeholders mentioned that feedback can improve health care by creating awareness, enabling self-reflection and reflection on peers or colleagues, and by benchmarking to others. Patients prefer feedback on the actual professional practice that matches the health care received, whereas medical specialists and health insurers are interested mainly in health care outcomes. All stakeholders largely prefer a bar graph. Patients prefer a pie chart for patient-reported outcomes and experiences, while Kaplan-Meier survival curves are preferred by medical specialists. Feedback should be simple with firstly an overview, and 1-4 times a year sent by e-mail. Finally, patients and health professionals are cautious with regard to transparency of audit data. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study shows how feedback preferences differ between stakeholders. Therefore, tailored reports are recommended. Using this information, effects of audit and feedback can be improved by adapting the feedback format and contents to the preferences of stakeholders

Audit · Benchmarking · Business · Exploratory research · Family medicine · Health care · Medical education · Psychological intervention · Innovations in Medical Education · Medicine · Nursing · Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare · Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare · Psychology

  • The Quality of Care

    Avedis Donabedian•JAMA•1988

  • What is an adequate sample size? Operationalising data saturation for theory-based interview studies

    J Francis, Jill J Francis et al.•Psychology & Health•2010

  • Qualitative research in health care

    Open Access•Catherine Pope•BMJ•2000

  • Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (Coreq)

    A Jaure, A Tong et al.•International Journal for Quality…•2007

  • Patients’ and health professionals’ understanding of and preferences for graphical presentation styles for individual-level EORTC QLQ-C30 scores

    Open Access•Wilma Kuijpers, Johannes M Giesinger et al.•Quality of Life Research•2015

  • The applications of PROs in clinical practice

    Open Access•Joanne Greenhalgh•Quality of Life Research•2008

  • Cancer patients' preferences for communicating clinical trial quality of life information

    Open Access•Michael Brundage, A Leis et al.•Quality of Life Research•2003

  • What to Do When Stakeholders Matter

    Open Access•John M Bryson, Gary L Cunningham et al.•Public Administration Review•2002

  • Meta-Analysis

    Sylvia J Hysong•Medical Care•2009

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae