PATIENT SATISFACTION QUESTIONNAIRE July 2011. Special Acknowledgments Tanya Ekomiak and Erin...

PATIENT SATISFACTIONQUESTIONNAIRE

July 2011

Special Acknowledgments Tanya Ekomiak and Erin Noseworthy our

Administrative Interns for their diligence and creativity in developing the survey and reports

FedNor for providing the funding to hire the Administrative Assistants

Pierre Ozolins for his assistance in developing the questionnaire and guidance during the process

The patients that agreed to participate in the survey

• Background Data• Summary of Demographics• Quality of Care Section• Procedures Section• Cleanliness/Dietary/Accessibility/Fees Section• Overall Satisfaction with Quality of Service

Section• Compliments and Concerns

CONTENTS

• Patients selected from 2009/2010 HIS • Removed duplicates & patients with missing data• Final data set (n) = 9,880• Sample = 2,718 • 1,000 or 37% patients agreed to participate• Erin Noseworthy completed initial calls in 2010• Tanya Ekomiak completed follow-up calls in 2011

BACKGROUND DATA

Department Total SampleSize

TotalSurveye

d

% (survey/

size)

Emergency 2636 878 295 34%

Inpatient 100 100 13 13%

Clinics (Including specialists, diabetes clinic, physiotherapy,chemo therapy, etc)

2342 780 309 40%

Day Surgery/Lab/Diagnostic Imaging 4802 960 383 40%

Grand Total 9880 2718 1000 36.8%

• Of the 1,000 participants 42% were male & 58% were female• Participants were divided into 9 different age groups:

N/A, 81-100, 71-80, 61-70, 51-60, 41-50, 31-40, 21-30,

& 0-20 years of age• The 61-70 cohort, with 268 participants, had the highest

participation rate• The distribution of responses by age group is fairly consistent with

Elliot Lake’s demographics, 74% of the participants were over 50

SUMMARY OF DEMOGRAPHICS

N/A 1910-1929

(81-100)

1930-1939

(71-80)

1940-1949

(61-70)

1950-1959

(51-60)

1960-1969

(41-50)

1970-1979

(31-40)

1980-1989

(21-30)

1990-2010(0-20)

M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F

Totals2 8 35 37 109 133 108 160 65 89 30 59 13 31 10 19 44 48

10 72 242 268 154 89 44 29 92

Total Male: 416 Total Female: 584

Grand Total: 1000

Age Characteristics of SJGHELAge Characteristics of

Elliot Lake

8

2

37

35

133

109

160

108

89

65

59

30

31

13

19

10

48

44

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Total Number

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

N/A

81-1

0071

-80

61-7

051

-60

41-5

031

-40

21-3

00-

20Ag

e Gro

up an

d Gen

der

Total Number of Respondents by Age Group and Gender

Department Most Recently Visited by Gender

• Emergency had 420 visits, 62% female – 38% male• Specialists had 127 visits, 52% female – 48% male• Day Surgery had 125 visits, 59% female – 41% male

4242

7154

87

316

1026

1937

307

261159

22

6661

236

4246

23

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Total Amount

1st Floor

Chemotherapy

Day Surgery

Diabetes Outreach Clinic

Dietary Counseling

ICU

Inpatient 3rd Floor

Lab

OBS

Outpatient Emergency

Physiotherapy

Specialists' Clinics

Speech Therapy

Surgeons' Clinic(Dr.Long & Dr.Stirling)

X-Ray

Department Most Recently Visited by Gender

Male

Female

• The 61-70 cohort were our most frequent visitors at 268 visits

– Emergency Department: 90 of 420 visits - 21% of total

– Specialists’ Clinic: 40 of 127 visits - 31% of total

– Day Surgery: 37 of 125 visits - 30% of total

– Surgeon’s Clinic: 36 of 78 visits - 46% of total

– X-Ray: 24 of 69 visits - 35% of total

• The 71-80 age group, with 242 visits, was the group with the 2nd highest number of visits

– Physiotherapy: 2 or 4 visits - 50% of total

– Laboratory: 22 of 67 visits - 33% of total

– 3rd Floor: 17 of 45 admissions - 38% of total

– Dietary Counseling: 3 of 3 visits - 100% of total

– 1st Floor: 4 of 6 admissions - 67% of total

• The 21-30 years of age patients accounted for 3 of 7 Obstetric admissions - 43% of total

Department Most Recently Visited by Age Group

•The 51-60 year old patients represented 50% of the Chemotherapy patients surveyed with 3 of the 6 patients

4 2

1 1 3 1

1 7 26 37 22 11 8 2 11

5 5 4 1

3

5 8 8 2 1 2

6 17 10 6 3 2 1

1 6 22 16 14 5 2 1

2 3 2

7 24 82 90 65 49 24 22 57

2 1 1

15 36 40 15 3 11 16

1 1

3 20 36 10 5 3 1

6 16 24 11 10 11

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Total Amount

1st Floor

Chemotherapy

Day Surgery

Diabetes Outreach Clinic

Dietary Counseling

ICU

Inpatient 3rd Floor

Lab

OBS

Outpatient Emergency

Physiotherapy

Specialists' Clinics

Speech Therapy

Surgeons' Clinic(Dr.Long & Dr.Stirling)

X-Ray

N/A

1910-1929

1930-1939

1940-1949

1950-1959

1960-1969

1970-1979

1980-1989

1990-2010

•The following departments had visits from the following cohorts:–Speech Therapy: 1 visit each from 0-20 & 71-80 cohorts - 100% of total–ICU: 8 of 26 admissions each from 61-70 & 71-80 cohorts - 62% of total–Diabetes Outreach Clinic: evenly distributed 4 visits from the 51-60 cohort & 5 visits each from the 61-70 & 71-80 age groups - 93% of total

QUALITY OF CARE

The overall score of 91.7% implies that SJGHEL

excelled in providing qualityof care

Total Positive Score

8052

n size for 1-7b 8777

% Positive Score 91.7%

Statement PS%

4c. Other health care professionals treated me with dignity and respect 97.0%

6. My privacy was respect 96.9%

2. Admitting staff were courteous, and treated me with dignity and respect 96.5%

4b. The doctors treated me with dignity and respect 95.9%

4a. The nurses treated me with dignity and respect 95.8%

7b. The services provided to me through pastoral care met my needs related to my visit 92.5%

5. I felt my concerns were heard, and I received answers to my questions 90.3%

1. I was cared for promptly in the Admitting Department 90.2%

3a. The wait time to see a nurse was acceptable 87.9%

3b. The wait time to see my doctor was acceptable 78.1%

7a. In the event that I required the services of pastoral/spiritual care, I was adequately informed of these services 76.6%

WHERE WE EXCEL IN QUALITY OF CARE: • Other health care professionals (x-ray/lab technicians, dietitians, chiropodist,

physiotherapists, etc) excelled in treating patients with dignity and respect (97%)

• SJGHEL exceeded in respecting patient privacy (96.9%)

• Admitting staff were courteous and excelled in treating patients with dignity and respect (96.5%)

• Doctors excelled in treating patients with dignity and respect (95.9%)

• Nurses excelled in treating patients with dignity and respect (95.8%)

• Pastoral Care exceeded meeting the needs of patients (92.5%)

• The hospital excelled in addressing patient concerns and in providing answers to their questions (90.3%)

• Admitting Department excelled in caring for patients promptly (90.2%)

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT:• Shorten the wait-time to see a doctor (78.1%)

• Provide better information on Pastoral Care services that we provide (76.6%)

PERCENTAGE POSITIVE SCORE BY GENDER: Male:

– Their 97.6% score indicates that SJGHEL excelled in respecting their privacy– Their 77.3% score demonstrates that the hospital needs to improve on the wait

time to see a doctor

Female:– Their 96.7% score indicates that other health care professionals excelled in

treating them with dignity and respect– Their 74.4% score suggests that the hospital can improve on the information we

provide to patients about the pastoral/spiritual care services offered

90.8%94.3%

74.4%79.2%

96.4%97.6%

88.6%91.5%

96.7%97.3%

95.4%96.4%

95.5%96.2%

78.8%77.3%

88.5%87.0%

96.3%96.8%

91.0%89.0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

% Positive Score

Sum of MALE %Sum of FEMALE %











12

3a

3b

4a

4b

4c

56

7a

7b

Sta

tem

en

t Nu

mb

er

& G

en

de

r

% Positive Scores by Statement for QUALITY OF CARE (by Gender)

PERCENTAGE POSITIVE SCORE BY AGE GROUP:• The 61-70 year old patients had a score of 94.1% which implies that

SJGHEL excelled in providing them quality of care

• However, the 21-30 age group were less satisfied with the quality of care they received with a score of 83.5% which is good, “but” since many of these respondents commented on their experience related to their children we need do more research to see what we can do to address their concerns

79.3%

91.9%

93.0%

94.1%

92.8%

88.6%

90.7%

83.5%

86.5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

% Positive Score

N/A

81-100

71-80

61-70

51-60

41-50

31-40

21-30

0-20

Ag

e G

rou

p

% Positive Scores by Age Group for QUALITY OF CARE

PROCEDURES


2695

n size for 9-12 3188


The overall score of 84.5%exemplifies respondents’

satisfaction with the proceduresthat they received

8. I had pain while in the hospital (True/False) True: 50.7% False: 49.3%

Statement PS%

10a. For any procedures or tests that were recommended to me related to my health care issue, I was informed of any risks associated with the procedure, and if applicable, signed a consent form

86.0%

12. I was provided with follow up, or discharge instructions, related to my visit, and was advised of steps to take, or who to contact, if my symptoms persisted, resumed, or worsened.

86.0%

9. If I had pain while at the hospital, hospital staff did everything they could to control my pain 85.5%

11. When prescribed medication, I was informed how the medication worked and possible side effects in a manner that I understood

83.2%

10b. For any procedures or tests that I had completed at the hospital, I was informed of when I could expect results back, of if I was given my results back at the time of the visit, the results were explained to me in a way I could understand

82.0%

51.4%

50.2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Percentage

Male

Female

Gen

der

8. I had pain while in the hospital - "True" Responses

OVERVIEW OF RESPONSES TO QUESTION 8:• Question 8, “I had pain while in the hospital”, is a true/false question; thus, a

positive score percentage is not suitable for the responses.• In total, 50.7% reported having pain; 51.4% of males reported pain and

50.2% of females had pain• Males believe the hospital staff excelled in controlling their pain (90.6%) • Females were less satisfied with their pain management (81.8%)• Therefore, a notable area of improvement lies in increasing satisfaction

among female patients in regards to pain management

0.9%1.4%

8.9%7.2%

21.5%22.5%

24.3%24.9%

17.8%14.7%

8.4%11.6%

3.7%5.8%

3.3%3.4%

11.2%8.5%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Percentage

0-20

21-30

31-40

41-50

51-60

61-70

71-80

81-100

N/A

Age

Gro

up a

nd G

ende

r

Total Number of Respondents in Pain by Age Group and Gender

• The 61-70 age group reported having pain most frequently, males with 24.9% and females with 24.3%

AREAS FOR IMPROVING PAIN MANAGEMENT:•Location of parking in relation to the main entrance (painful to walk)

•Increase availability to Physiotherapy (Knee and Hip Replacements)

•Improve access to Emergency Department & Physicians at night

•Reduce wait times in Emergency & other departments

PERCENTAGE POSITIVE SCORE BY GENDER:• Females’ highest score of 84.6% indicates their level of contentment about

being informed of any risks associated with their procedures

• Males’ lowest score of 81.1% demonstrates less satisfaction with being informed of when they could expect results back

84.2%

88.3%

82.6%

84.0%

82.8%

81.1%

84.6%

87.9%

81.8%

90.6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

% Positive Score

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

91

0a

10

b1

11

2

Sta

tem

en

t Nu

mb

er

& G

en

de

r

% Positive Scores by Statement for PROCEDURES (by Gender)

PERCENTAGE POSITIVE SCORE BY AGE GROUP:• The 61-70 cohort had a score of 88.7% which illustrates their satisfaction

with their procedures or tests

• In contrast, the 31-40 age group was less satisfied at 76.8%; further research is required to determine the underlying issues

68.8%

80.6%

85.9%

88.7%

85.1%

77.2%

76.8%

80.2%

85.2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

% Positive Score

N/A

81-100

71-80

61-70

51-60

41-50

31-40

21-30

0-20

Age

Gro

up% Positive Score by Age Group for PROCEDURES

CLEANLINESS/DIETARY/

ACCESSIBLITY/FEES


2494

n size for 13-17 2860


The overall score of 87.2%shows that respondents

are satisfied with these areas

Statement PS%

13. The areas of the hospital I was in were clean 96.3%

17. Where fees applied, they were reasonable in relation to what other hospitals charge forsimilar services

88.5%

16. Where fees applied, I was informed of them in advance 86.3%

14. The food served to me was enjoyable 79.1%

15. Parking facilities enabled me to access the hospital without undue effort 78.8%

WHERE WE EXCEL IN CLEANLINESS/DIETARY/ACCESSIBLITIY/ FEES:

• Providing a clean hospital (96.3%)

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT:• Serving enjoyable food (79.1%)

• Parking facilities that enable patients to access the hospital without undue effort (78.8%)

PERCENTAGE POSITIVE SCORE BY GENDER:Male:

– Their 95.9% score signifies that SJGHEL excelled in cleanliness– Their 77.1% score demonstrates that the food served to them needs to be

improvedFemale:

– Their 96.6% score reaffirms that SJGHEL excelled in cleanliness– Their 78.7% score indicates that the parking facilities need to be improved

91.9%

84.1%

85.8%

86.8%

78.7%

78.8%

80.4%

77.1%

96.6%

95.9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

% Positive Score

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

13

14

15

16

17

Sta

tem

en

t Nu

mb

er

& G

en

de

r

% Positive Scores by Statement for CLEANLINESS/DIETARY/ACCESSIBILITY/FEES (by Gender)

PERCENTAGE POSITIVE SCORE BY AGE GROUP:• Respondents between the ages of 81-100 had the highest score in this part

of the survey at 89.9%

• The 41-50 year olds were the least satisfied at 81.1%

81.0%

89.9%

87.9%

88.0%

87.6%

81.1%

87.8%

86.4%

86.5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

% Positive Score

N/A

81-100

71-80

61-70

51-60

41-50

31-40

21-30

0-20

Age

Gro

up

% Positive Score by Age Group forCLEANLINESS, DIETARY, ACCESSIBILITY, FEES

OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH QUALITY OF SERVICE


2754

n size for 18-20 2977


The overall score of 92.5%verifies that SJGHEL excelled

in providing overall satisfaction totheir patients in regards to the

quality of service that theyreceived

Statement PS%

20. I would speak positively of St. Joseph’s General Hospital to my family and friends 94.2%

19. Overall, I was pleased with the service I received from St. Joseph’s General Hospital 93.4%

18. The health care issue that brought me to the hospital was addressed to my satisfaction 89.9%

WHERE WE EXCEL IN OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH THE QUALITY OF SERVICE:

• Patients would speak positively of SJGHEL to family and friends (94.2%); more male respondents (94.9%) than females (93.6%)

• Patients were pleased with the service they received from SJGHEL (93.4%); more male respondents (94.2%) than females (92.8%)

• Addressing male patients’ health care issue to their satisfaction (91.2%)

The top five cohorts to visit the hospital represent the majority of our market and were very satisfied with the services we provide:

• A score of 94.9% for patients 61-70 years of age





PERCENTAGE POSITIVE SCORE BY GENDER:• For each statement, it is evident that males are slightly more satisfied than

their female counterparts• Males’ satisfaction score of 94.9%, and females’ scoring at 93.6%, indicates

that both genders would speak positively of SJGHEL to family and friends• Males’ score of 91.2% reveals that the hospital excelled in addressing

their health care issue to their satisfaction• While females were slightly less satisfied in addressing their health care

issue with a score of 89.0%

93.6%

94.9%

92.8%

94.2%

89.0%

91.2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

% Positive Score

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

Sum of MALE %

Sum of FEMALE %

18

19

20

Sta

tem

en

t Nu

mb

er

& G

en

de

r% Positive Scores by Statement for OVERALL SATISFACTION with QUALITY OF SERVICE

(by Gender)

PERCENTAGE POSITIVE SCORE BY AGE GROUP:• Respondents 61-70 years of age have a score of 94.9% which implies that

SJGHEL excelled in providing them with an overall satisfaction with the quality of service

• The 21-30 year olds display less satisfaction with a score of 87.2%

65.5%

90.7%

93.6%

94.9%

94.1%

90.9%

89.1%

87.2%

89.0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

% Positive Score

N/A

81-100

71-80

61-70

51-60

41-50

31-40

21-30

0-20

Age

Gro

up

% Positive Scores by Age Group forOVERALL SATISFACTION with QUALITY OF SERVICE

COMPLIMENTS and CONCERNSRespondents provided a total of 1,326 compliments and concerns regardingtheir most recent hospital visit. The following table demonstrates the totalnumber of compliments and concerns along with percentages. More concernswere expressed by respondents with a total of 918, or 69.2%

Total %

Compliments 408 30.8

Concerns 918 69.2

Total 1326 100

COMPLIMENTSEvery patient who responded to the survey was asked if they “would like to share any further comments in regards to any exceptional staff or services that were provided to them during their most recent visit?” For analysis purposes, their responses were later categorized into themes.

Our top compliments include providing patients with what they acknowledge as a great hospital (16.7%), providing good service (11.5%), and treating patients

well (10.3%)

Compliment Category Total %

Great hospital 68 16.7

Good service 47 11.5

Treated patient well 42 10.3

Good experience/Good care 35 8.6

Doctors 32 7.8

Staff 32 7.8

Satisfied/Pleased with visit 26 6.4

Specified staff (broken down below) 23 5.6

ER/ICU/3rd Floor/Chemo 12 2.9

Lab/X-Ray/Physiotherapy 6 1.5

Administration 3 0.7

Admitting 2 0.5

Nurses 21 5.1

Good wait times 18 4.4

Maintenance/Well kept/Cleanliness 18 4.4

Lucky to have hospital here 15 3.7

Friendliness of staff 15 3.7

Would recommend hospital 9 2.2

Dietary enjoyment 5 1.2

Parking facilities 2 0.5

Total 408 99.9

Summary of Compliments

0.5%

1.2%

2.2%

3.7%

3.7%

4.4%

4.4%

5.1%

5.6%

6.4%

8.6%

10.3%

11.5%

7.8%

7.8%

16.7%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%

Parking facilities

Dietary enjoyment

Would recommend hospital

Friendliness of staff

Lucky to have hospital here

Maintenance/Well kept/Cleanliness

Good w ait times

Nurses

Specif ied staff

Satisfied/Pleased w ith visit

Staff

Doctors

Good experience/Good care

Treated patient w ell

Good service

Great hospital

Com

plim

ent

Cat

egor

y

Total

CONCERNSEvery patient who responded to the survey was asked to “check any concerns that they may have in regards to their most recent visit” along with any other concerns they would like to express. The following statements were provided to every respondent:

- Location of parking in relation to the main entrance to the hospital

- Appointment scheduling

- Access into the building - Patient monitoring by nurses

- Access to services within the building - Friendliness of staffThey were then asked if they had any additional concerns they would like to express. For analysis purposes, their responses were later categorized into themes.

Our area for improvement is the location of parking in relation to the main entrance to the hospital which has 260 concerns, or 28.3%. Additionally, there is a total of

11.7% of further concerns regarding the parking facilities which equals a total of 40% of the concerns

pertaining to the parking

Concern Category Total %

Location of parking in relation to the main entrance to the hospital 260 28.3

Parking facilities (broken down below) 108 11.7

Better parking facilities 35 3.8

Too many doctor/handicap parking/not enough regular parking at the front 27 2.9

Not enough handicap parking 24 2.6

Parking fees 22 2.4

Access into the building 86 9.4

Appointment scheduling 69 7.5

Patient monitoring by nurses 61 6.6

Wait times 54 5.9

Access to services within the building 48 5.2

Friendliness of staff 43 4.7

Doctors 38 4.1

Admitting/Triage 31 3.4

Nurses 29 3.2

Lacking equipment/staff 19 2.1

Cleanliness/Update 16 1.7

Staff 13 1.4

Signs 11 1.2

Dietary 11 1.2

Other 7 0.8

Not given results back 6 0.7

Treatment of senior patients 4 0.4

Smoking in non-smoking areas 4 0.4

Total 918 99.9

Summary of Concerns

0.4%

0.7%

0.8%

1.2%

1.2%

1.4%

1.7%

2.1%

3.2%3.4%

4.1%

4.7%

5.2%

5.9%

6.6%

7.5%

9.4%

11.7%

28.3%

0.4%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Smoking

Senior treatment

Not given results back

Other

Dietary

Signs

Staff

Cleanliness

Lacking equip/staff

Nurses

Admitting/Triage

Doctors

Friendliness of staff

Access to services

Wait times

Patient monitoring/nurses

Appointments

Access into building

Parking facilities

Parking/Entrance

Con

cern

Cat

egor

y

Total

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPORT?

St. Joseph’s General Hospital Elliot Lake commissioned the SJGHEL Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire to provide patients the opportunity to give their view on the services we provide. This important information about organization strengths and areas of improvement help us to take action and drive quality improvement within the organization so that we may better serve the community of Elliot Lake and surrounding catchment area.

Mike Hukezalie, the CEO of SJGHEL, arranged for the survey to be completed. Tanya Ekomiak and Erin Noseworthy, the administrative interns at St. Joseph’s General Hospital Elliot Lake, conducted the surveys through telephone interviews. Tanya Ekomiak assembled the results and wrote the final report.

Contact information:St. Joseph’s General Hospital, Elliot Lake

70 Spine RoadElliot Lake, Ontario

P5A 1X2Phone: (705) 848-7181 or (705) 848-7182

Mike Hukezalie: ext. 2420Tanya Ekomiak: ext. 2255

PATIENT SATISFACTION QUESTIONNAIRE July 2011. Special Acknowledgments Tanya Ekomiak and Erin...

Documents

Transcript of PATIENT SATISFACTION QUESTIONNAIRE July 2011. Special Acknowledgments Tanya Ekomiak and Erin...