[Parent satisfaction with a child and family-centered treatment program for primary headache in childhood and adolescence]

Patient satisfaction represents a significant outcome criterion in the context of systemic psychotherapeutic therapy research. This study investigated parent satisfaction with a psychosocial treatment program (comprising three components: child group therapy, parents' evenings, systemic family sessions) for pediatric primary headache (diagnosed according to IHS criteria). 10 weeks after the end of the treatment program, the parents were sent a questionnaire containing open questions and ten-point numerical rating scales. The sample comprised n=48 families. The return rate was 89%. The qualitative content analysis showed a hierarchical category system consisting of 3 major categories, 7 main groups and 69 sub-categories. The parents stated that they were satisfied with (1.) the effects of the treatment program, (2.) the specific treatment techniques and the medical and psychosocial headache-related information provided, and (3.) the therapeutic relationship. The mean satisfaction for all three therapy components on the ten-point numerical rating scale was 8.1 with a standard deviation of 2.0 (child headache group: 8.5; parents' evenings: 8.2; family sessions: 7.5). The results are discussed with reference to methodological aspects: avoidance of ceiling effects and social desirability in measuring customer satisfaction, order effects of items, weighting of the significance of satisfaction levels as an outcome criterion.

Comparison of performance and patient satisfaction of two types of ERG electrodes

BACKGROUND: An age-controlled comparison concerning patient satisfaction and electrical performance of microfibres (DTL) and rigid contact lens (Henkes) corneal ERG electrodes was carried out. METHODS: 36 test persons underwent complete ophthalmological examination and were equally distributed into 3 age groups. Electroretinograms were recorded according to ISCEV standards. Randomly, in one eye a Henkes electrode was used and in the other eye a DTL electrode. Amplitudes of a- and b-waves and implicit times were measured and compared for the two electrode types. RESULTS: 34 of 36 test persons preferred DTL electrodes. Electrical performance concerning b-wave amplitudes was comparable. Statistically significant differences were detected only for scotopic combined cone-rod stimulation in the age groups 20 - 40 and 41 - 60 years between the different electrodes. Other recordings did not show differences. A statistically significant reduction of signal amplitudes with age was detected for scotopic isolated rod signals and combined cone-rod signals. Significance level was p < 0.05. No conjunctival or corneal erosions were found after ERG recordings for either electrode. CONCLUSIONS: Electrical performance is comparable between electrodes. For scotopic stimulations age was a significant influencing factor for signal amplitude and should be respected for normative values. DTL electrodes were preferred by the vast majority of patients. No adverse clinical effects were observed for either electrode. DTL electrodes should be preferred due to hygienic reasons (single use) and patient comfort.

Within-subject comparison of two rigid bar designs connecting two interforaminal implants: patients' satisfaction and prosthetic results

BACKGROUND: There is evidence for the superiority of two-implant overdentures over complete dentures in the mandible. Various anchorage devices were used to provide stability to overdentures. The aim of the present study was to compare two designs of a rigid bar connecting two mandibular implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Completely edentulous patients received a new denture in the maxilla and an implant-supported overdenture in the mandible. They were randomly allocated to two groups (A or B) with regard to the bar design. A standard U-shaped bar (Dolder bar) was used connecting the two implants in a straight line. For comparison, precision attachments were soldered distal to the bar copings. Group A started the study with the standard bar (S-bar), while group B started with the attachment-bar (A-bar). After 3 months, they had to answer a questionnaire (visual analogue scale [VAS]); then the bar design was changed in both groups. After a period of another 3 months, the patients had to answer the same questions; then they had the choice to keep their preferred bar. Now the study period was extended to another year of observation, and the patients answered again the same questionnaire. In vivo force measurements were carried out with both bar types at the end of the test periods. The prosthetic maintenance service carried out during the 6-month period was recorded for both bar types in both groups. Statistical analysis as performed with the SPSS statistical package (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). RESULTS: Satisfaction was high in both groups. Group B, who had entered the study with the attachment bar, gave slightly better ratings to this type for four items, while in group A, no differences were found. At the end of the 6-month comparison period, all but one patient wished to continue to wear the attachment bar. Prosthetic service was equal in groups A and B, but the total number of interventions is significantly higher in the attachment bar. Force patterns of maximum biting were similar in both bar designs, but exhibited significantly higher axial forces in the attachment bar. CONCLUSIONS: Both bar designs provide good retention and functional comfort. High stability appears to be an important factor for the patients' satisfaction and oral comfort. Rigid retention results in a higher force impact and appears to evoke the need for the retightening of occlusal screws, resulting in more maintenance service.

Patient satisfaction of primary care for musculoskeletal diseases: A comparison between Neural Therapy and conventional medicine

Background The main objective of this study was to assess and compare patient satisfaction with Neural Therapy (NT) and conventional medicine (COM) in primary care for musculoskeletal diseases. Methods A cross-sectional study in primary care for musculoskeletal disorders covering 77 conventional primary care providers and 18 physicians certified in NT with 241 and 164 patients respectively. Patients and physicians documented consultations and patients completed questionnaires at a one-month follow-up. Physicians documented duration and severity of symptoms, diagnosis, and procedures. The main outcomes in the evaluation of patients were: fulfillment of expectations, perceived treatment effects, and patient satisfaction. Results The most frequent diagnoses belonged to the group of dorsopathies (39% in COM, 46% in NT). We found significant differences between NT and COM with regard to patient evaluations. NT patients documented better fulfilment of treatment expectations and higher overall treatment satisfaction. More patients in NT reported positive side effects and less frequent negative effects than patients in COM. Also, significant differences between NT and COM patients were seen in the quality of the patient-physician interaction (relation and communication, medical care, information and support, continuity and cooperation, facilities availability, and accessibility), where NT patients showed higher satisfaction. Differences were also found with regard to the physicians' management of disease, with fewer work incapacity attestations issued and longer consultation times in NT. Conclusion Our findings show a significantly higher treatment and care-related patient satisfaction with primary care for musculoskeletal diseases provided by physicians practising Neural Therapy.

Patient satisfaction and side effects in primary care: An observational study comparing homeopathy and conventional medicine

Background This study is part of a nationwide evaluation of complementary medicine in Switzerland (Programme Evaluation of Complementary Medicine PEK) and was funded by the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health. The main objective of this study is to investigate patient satisfaction and perception of side effects in homeopathy compared with conventional care in a primary care setting. Methods We examined data from two cross-sectional studies conducted in 2002–2003. The first study was a physician questionnaire assessing structural characteristics of practices. The second study was conducted on four given days during a 12-month period in 2002/2003 using a physician and patient questionnaire at consultation and a patient questionnaire mailed to the patient one month later (including Europep questionnaire). The participating physicians were all trained and licensed in conventional medicine. An additional qualification was required for medical doctors providing homeopathy (membership in the Swiss association of homeopathic physicians SVHA). Results A total of 6778 adult patients received the questionnaire and 3126 responded (46.1%). Statistically significant differences were found with respect to health status (higher percentage of chronic and severe conditions in the homeopathic group), perception of side effects (higher percentage of reported side effects in the conventional group) and patient satisfaction (higher percentage of satisfied patients in the homeopathic group). Conclusion Overall patient satisfaction was significantly higher in homeopathic than in conventional care. Homeopathic treatments were perceived as a low-risk therapy with two to three times fewer side effects than conventional care

Outcome and patients' satisfaction after functional treatment of acute lateral ankle injuries at emergency departments versus family doctor offices

BACKGROUND: In some Western countries, more and more patients seek initial treatment even for minor injuries at emergency units of hospitals. The initial evaluation and treatment as well as aftercare of these patients require large amounts of personnel and logistical resources, which are limited and costly, especially if compared to treatment by a general practitioner. In this study, we investigated whether outsourcing from our level 1 trauma center to a general practitioner has an influence on patient satisfaction and compliance. METHODS: This prospective, randomized study, included n = 100 patients who suffered from a lateral ankle ligament injury grade I-II (16, 17). After radiological exclusion of osseous lesions, the patients received early functional treatment and were shown physical therapy exercises to be done at home, without immobilization or the use of stabilizing ortheses. The patients were randomly assigned into two groups of 50 patients each: Group A (ER): Follow-up and final examination in the hospital's emergency unit. Group B (GP): Follow-up by general practitioner, final examination at hospital's emergency unit. The patients were surveyed regarding their satisfaction with the treatment and outcome of the treatment. RESULTS: Female and male patients were equally represented in both groups. The age of the patients ranged from 16 - 64 years, with a mean age of 34 years (ER) and 35 years (GP). 98% (n = 98) of all patients were satisfied with their treatment, and 93% (n = 93) were satisfied with the outcome. For these parameters no significant difference between the two groups could be noted (p = 0.7406 and 0.7631 respectively). 39% of all patients acquired stabilizing ortheses like ankle braces (Aircast, Malleoloc etc.) on their own initiative. There was a not significant tendency for more self-acquired ortheses in the group treated by general practicioners (p = 0,2669). CONCLUSION: Patients who first present at the ER with a lateral ankle ligament injury grade I-II can be referred to a general practitioner for follow-up treatment without affecting patient satisfaction regarding treatment and treatment outcome.

Patient satisfaction with primary care: an observational study comparing anthroposophic and conventional care

BACKGROUND: This study is part of a cross-sectional evaluation of complementary medicine providers in primary care in Switzerland. It compares patient satisfaction with anthroposophic medicine (AM) and conventional medicine (CON). METHODS: We collected baseline data on structural characteristics of the physicians and their practices and health status and demographics of the patients. Four weeks later patients assessed their satisfaction with the received treatment (five items, four point rating scale) and evaluated the praxis care (validated 23-item questionnaire, five point rating scale). 1946 adult patients of 71 CON and 32 AM primary care physicians participated. RESULTS: 1. Baseline characteristics: AM patients were more likely female (75.6% vs. 59.0%, p < 0.001) and had higher education (38.6% vs. 24.7%, p < 0.001). They suffered more often from chronic illnesses (52.8% vs. 46.2%, p = 0.015) and cancer (7.4% vs. 1.1%). AM consultations lasted on average 23,3 minutes (CON: 16,8 minutes, p < 0.001). 2. Satisfaction: More AM patients expressed a general treatment satisfaction (56.1% vs. 43.4%, p < 0.001) and saw their expectations completely fulfilled at follow-up (38.7% vs. 32.6%, p < 0.001). AM patients reported significantly fewer adverse side effects (9.3% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.003), and more other positive effects from treatment (31.7% vs. 17.1%, p < 0.001). Europep: AM patients appreciated that their physicians listened to them (80.0% vs. 67.1%, p < 0.001), spent more time (76.5% vs. 61.7%, p < 0.001), had more interest in their personal situation (74.6% vs. 60.3%, p < 0.001), involved them more in decisions about their medical care (67.8% vs. 58.4%, p = 0.022), and made it easy to tell the physician about their problems (71.6% vs. 62.9%, p = 0.023). AM patients gave significantly better rating as to information and support (in 3 of 4 items p [less than or equal to] 0.044) and for thoroughness (70.4% vs. 56.5%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: AM patients were significantly more satisfied and rated their physicians as valuable partners in the treatment. This suggests that subject to certain limitations, AM therapy may be beneficial in primary care. To confirm this, more detailed qualitative studies would be necessary.

Family satisfaction in the intensive care unit: what makes the difference?

PURPOSE: To assess family satisfaction in the ICU and to identify parameters for improvement. METHODS: Multicenter study in Swiss ICUs. Families were given a questionnaire covering overall satisfaction, satisfaction with care and satisfaction with information/decision-making. Demographic, medical and institutional data were gathered from patients, visitors and ICUs. RESULTS: A total of 996 questionnaires from family members were analyzed. Individual questions were assessed, and summary measures (range 0-100) were calculated, with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction. Summary score was 78 +/- 14 (mean +/- SD) for overall satisfaction, 79 +/- 14 for care and 77 +/- 15 for information/decision-making. In multivariable multilevel linear regression analyses, higher severity of illness was associated with higher satisfaction, while a higher patient:nurse ratio and written admission/discharge criteria were associated with lower overall satisfaction. Using performance-importance plots, items with high impact on overall satisfaction but low satisfaction were identified. They included: emotional support, providing understandable, complete, consistent information and coordination of care. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, proxies were satisfied with care and with information/decision-making. Still, several factors, such as emotional support, coordination of care and communication, are associated with poor satisfaction, suggesting the need for improvement. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00134-009-1611-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.