Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2014 Aug;29(8):1105-12.
doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2783-3. Epub 2014 Mar 8.

Exploration of an automated approach for receiving patient feedback after outpatient acute care visits

Eta S Berner  1 , Midge N Ray, Anantachai Panjamapirom, Richard S Maisiak, James H Willig, Thomas M English, Marc Krawitz, Christa R Nevin, Shannon Houser, Mark P Cohen, Gordon D Schiff
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Exploration of an automated approach for receiving patient feedback after outpatient acute care visits

Eta S Berner et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2014 Aug.

Abstract

Background: To improve and learn from patient outcomes, particularly under new care models such as Accountable Care Organizations and Patient-Centered Medical Homes, requires establishing systems for follow-up and feedback.

Objective: To provide post-visit feedback to physicians on patient outcomes following acute care visits.

Design: A three-phase cross-sectional study [live follow-up call three weeks after acute care visits (baseline), one week post-visit live call, and one week post-visit interactive voice response system (IVRS) call] with three patient cohorts was conducted. A family medicine clinic and an HIV clinic participated in all three phases, and a cerebral palsy clinic participated in the first two phases. Patients answered questions about symptom improvement, medication problems, and interactions with the healthcare system.

Patients: A total of 616 patients were included: 142 from Phase 1, 352 from Phase 2 and 122 from Phase 3.

Main measures: Primary outcomes included: problem resolution, provider satisfaction with the system, and comparison of IVRS with live calls made by research staff.

Key results: During both live follow-up phases, at least 96% of patients who were reached completed the call compared to only 48% for the IVRS phase. At baseline, 98 of 113 (88%) patients reported improvement, as well as 167 of 196 (85%) in the live one-week follow-up. In the one-week IVRS phase, 25 of 39 (64%) reported improvement. In all phases, the majority of patients in both the improved and unimproved groups had not contacted their provider or another provider. While 63% of providers stated they wanted to receive patient feedback, they varied in the extent to which they used the feedback reports.

Conclusions: Many patients who do not improve as expected do not take action to further address unresolved problems. Systematic follow-up/feedback mechanisms can potentially identify and connect such patients to needed care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Example of physician feedback.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Berwick DM. Launching accountable care organizations—the proposed rule for the Medicare Shared Savings Program. New Engl J Med. 2011;364(16):e32. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1103602. - DOI - PubMed
    1. American College of Physicians. The advanced medical home: a patient-centered, physician-guided model of health care. Philadelphia: American College of Physicians; 2005.
    1. Davis K, Schoenbaum SC, Audet AM. A 2020 vision of patient-centered primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(10):953–957. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0178.x. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Patient centered medical home resource center [January 6, 2013]. Available from: http://pcmh.ahrq.gov/.
    1. Engineering a Learning Healthcare System. A look at the future: workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011. - PubMed

Publication types