Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wensing, M.
Right arrow Articles by Van Montfort, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wensing, M.
Right arrow Articles by Van Montfort, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice Vol. 13, No. 4, 386-390
© Oxford University Press 1996

research-article

Evaluation of general practice care by chronically ill patients: effect of the method of administration

Michel Wensing, Richard Grol, Anton Smiths and Pauline Van Montfort

Centre for Quality of Care Research (WOK), Universities of studies Nijmegen and Maastricht The Netherlands

Correspondence to M Wensing, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND.: Although the patient survey has become a popular method for learning about patients' views and experiences, little attention has been paid to the validity and feasibility of different survey methods.

OBJECTIVE.: A study was undertaken to compare handing out written questionnaires to chronically ill patients who consecutively visited the general practice with mailing questionnaires to chronically ill patients who were sampled from the patient register.

METHOD.: Patient surveys were performed in eight general practices in The Netherlands, applying both methods of administering the questionnaire to patients in each practice (n = 345).

RESULTS.: The response rate was 63% in the mail survey and 72% in the hand-distributed survey. The sample composition was almost equal, except that patients in the hand-distributed survey more often reported having "a different chronic disease". The item-response for each aspect of care was similar in both methods of administration.

CONCLUSIONS.: Patients in the mail survey tended to use the extreme categories on the scale for certain aspects of care more often than patients in the hand-distributed survey, but the overall trend was not significant.

Keywords. Patient evaluation, patient satisfaction, survey methods.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Qual Saf Health CareHome page
M Wensing and G Elwyn
Research on patients' views in the evaluation and improvement of quality of care
Qual. Saf. Health Care, June 1, 2002; 11(2): 153 - 157.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.