Efficacy of a real-time patient feedback system: patient satisfaction study in psychiatry

Abstract

Aim: The aim of the study was two-fold: first, to assess the efficacy of an electronic real-time feedback system; second, to examine patient satisfaction.

Methods: This was a mixed-method study. Data were collected from two psychiatric outpatient clinics using electronic patient feedback devices. The efficacy of the real-time feedback system was assessed by calculating the overall response rate, and the response rate to each individual five-point Likert scale statement and open-ended question by using descriptive statistics. Patient satisfaction was examined by analyzing the response rate to each statement. Open-ended feedback was analyzed by using inductive qualitative content analysis.

Results: The overall response rate was 21.0% (n = 1658) and response rates varied by statements. Most of the patients saw that they received the appointment to the outpatient clinic quickly enough (n = 1404, 85%), the personnel treated them well (n = 1126, 95%), the information about the care was understandable (n = 1066, 94%), and decisions regarding their care were made together with them (n = 1051, 94%). Of the patients, 94% (n = 1052) would recommend the service. Positive open-ended feedback highlighted good service, skilled staff, perceived benefits and help from care. Critique and development areas dealt with the large number of forms that required filling out beforehand, subjective experience of long waiting times, and having too many collaborative professionals present during treatment.

Conclusions: The real-time feedback system proved to be an efficient method of gathering patient feedback. Patient satisfaction seemed to be high with received care in all fields.

Keywords:

• Real-time feedback
• patient satisfaction
• psychiatry

Ethical issues

The permission for the study (HUS 162/2018) was obtained from the Department of Psychiatry in University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital. All data was anonymous, and no ethical appraisal was required.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank all the professionals who helped us carry out the study and especially the patients who participated and gave us a few minutes of their time.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Camilla M. Werkkala

Camilla M. Werkkala is RN, MNSc and Nurse Manager in an acute ward.

Heli M. Bäckmand

Heli M. Bäckmand is RN, PhD and Project Director in HUS.

Lauri M. Kuosmanen

Lauri M. Kuosmanen is RN, PhD and Professor.

Marjut H. Vastamäki

Marjut H. Vastamäki is RN and Deputy Nurse Manager.

Tuula H. Rajala

Tuula H. Rajala is RN, MNSc and Nurse Administrator.

Pekka R. Lindqvist

Pekka R. Lindqvist RN and Nurse Manager.

Pekka J. Jylhä

Pekka J. Jylhä is MD, PhD and Head of Acute Psychiatry and Consultations in HUS.