Effects of Writing Down the Request for Help on Patient Satisfaction in General Practices
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01466140|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : November 7, 2011
Last Update Posted : November 7, 2011
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Patient Satisfaction Doctor Satisfaction Duration of Consultation||Other: Writing down request for help||Not Applicable|
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Actual Enrollment :||209 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Primary Purpose:||Health Services Research|
|Official Title:||Effects of Writing Down the Request for Help With Regard to Patient Satisfaction in General Practices|
|Study Start Date :||January 2011|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||March 2011|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||May 2011|
No Intervention: Control group
Patients in the control group were asked to participate in a patient satisfaction study. They were asked to fill in a questionnaire with respect to patient satisfaction.
Experimental: Use of request card
Patients in the intervention group were told that the practice was participating in a patient satisfaction study, and they were given an envelope with information about the 'doorknob phenomenon' and a request card. The envelope for the control group only consisted of information about a patient satisfaction study, without any information on the 'doorknob phenomenon', and without a request card. Both groups received the same letter with patient information about the study.
Other: Writing down request for help
Patients in the intervention group could write down their request for help on a request card (with a maximum of 2 questions).
- Patient satisfaction measured with the Consultation Satisfaction Questionnaire [ Time Frame: 15-30 minutes (after the consultation patients filled in the questionnaire) ]The primary endpoint is the 'Professional Care' (PC) scale of the 'Consultation Satisfaction Questionnaire' (CSQ). In a previous study the score on the PC were 88.2 en 80.9 in the intervention and control groups, respectively. The standard deviations were 11.8 en 16.1. For our sample size calculation we used an expected standard deviation of 15. The sample size required to detect a difference of 7 on the PC scale between the intervention and control group, with a power of 90%, and alpha of 5% (two-tailed), and a standard deviation of 15, was 196 patients. We rounded this number off to 200.
- Patient satisfaction measured with the Visual Analog Scale [ Time Frame: 15-30 minutes (patients filled in the Visual Analog Scale after the consultation) ]On a scale of 0-10 patients could fill in the Visual Analog Scale with regard to the patient satisfaction during the consultation
- Doctor satisfaction measured with the Visual Analog Scale [ Time Frame: 15-30 minutes (general pracitioners filled in the Visual Analog Scale after the consultation) ]On a scale from 0-10 general practitioners could fill in the Visual Analog Scale with regard to their own satisfaction about the consultation
- Duration of the consultation [ Time Frame: 15-30 minutes (after the consultation the doctor measured the time with a stopwatch) ]Duration of the consultation was compared between both groups
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT01466140
|Zwolle, Overijssel, Netherlands, 8025 AB|
|Study Chair:||Henk Bilo||Medical Research Centre|