Case Study: Consumeri. Sm In Health Care
Consumeri sm in
Health
Care
Nicole Bertram & LaWanda Frazier
HCS/465
May 5, 2015
Bryan Alexander
Table of Contents
•
•
•
Background:
•
Summary
•
Effect on Consumers’ Perspectives
Methodology:
•
Overview of Data Collection
•
Validity and Reliability
Results:
•
Qualitative and Quantitative Aspects
•
•
•
Descriptive Statistics & Inferential Statistics
Effectiveness of the Study
Conclusions:
•
Future Trends of Health Care Research and Consumerism
Background
Extensive research has been done to define and measure health care quality, yet little has been done to address the consumers’ perspective of high-quality health care.
Summary
•
•
Relationship of quality of care
•
Provider/Patient care
•
Access of care
Nursing knowledge
•
•
•
Nursing skills
Patient Demographics
•
Chronic illness
•
Census tracts
Consumer survey
Effect on Consumer Perspective
•
Attributes of health care important to consumers
•
Access to care
•
Coordination of services
•
Education
•
Being treated with respect
•
Waiting times for appointments
Overview of Data Collection
•
•
Participants completed surveys
•
Quality Health Care Questionnaire (QHCQ).
•
SF-36
Midwestern Area
•
Urban and Suburban area
•
Over 18 years of age
•
Not hospitalized within last 6 months
Validity and Reliability
•
•
Validity
•
Surveys
•
Previous studies
Reliability
•
239 consumers recruited
•
Results compared to other studies
Results
•
Most important indicators of high quality nursing care:
•
Communication with nurses
•
Spending enough time (not rushed)
•
Having nurses who are up-to-date and well informed
•
•
Nurse ability and willingness to educate patients
Ratings differed by race, age, education level, income, and health status
Table 1. QHCQ Factor Score Means by Race
Caucasian
Factor
M(SD)
Medical Care
Quality
African
American
M(SD)
F
51.4 (6.2)
48.2 (8.4)
9.95
Teaching by
Nurses
48.9 (10.5)
52.6 (8.6)
6.77
Provider
Competence
49.5 (10.7)
51.9 (7.3)
2.82
Choice of
Provider
49.2 (9.7)
51.3 (10.5)
2.20
Nurse-Patient
Interaction
50.1 (9.7)
50.2 (10.6)
0.03
Convenience of Appointment
48.5 (9.8
53.5 (9.9)
12.24
Table 2. Correlation of QHCQ Factor Scores with Health Status and Demographic
Variables
*p < .05
**p <.01
Medical Care
Teaching by
Nurses
Provider
Competence
Choice of
Provider
Nurse-Patient
Interaction
Convenience of
Appointments
Physical Functioning
.124
-.057
.036
.113
-.049
-.150*
Role Limitations
(Physical)
-.024
-.034
-.004
.106
-.132*
-.049
Pain
.082
-.009
-.023
.053
-.033
-.042
Vitality
.059
-.069
-.058
.127
-.130
-.089
Social Functioning
.093
-.061
-.038
-.021
-.146*
-.126
Role limitations
(emotional)
.065
-.161*
.001
.051
.022
-.024
Mental Health
.127
-.160
.016
.005
-.085
-.096
General Health
.050
-2.74**
.034
.144*
-.058
-.162*
Number of Chronic
Illnesses
-.067
.250**
-.055
.237**
-.003
.135*
Age
.034
-.130*
-.096
-.330**
-.150*
.100
Education
.224**
-.190**
-.113
.063
.063
-.248**
Income
.204**
-.250**
-.154*
-.030
.061
-.260**
Results
Qualitative and Quantitative Aspects
Descriptive Statistics
•
Factor analysis
•
Factor scores were standardized to mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10
Sample Includes
Inferential Statistics
• 149 Women (63.1%)
• 87 Men (36.9%)
•
Generalization
Age Range
•
Predictions
• 18yrs-92yrs
• Mean age 50.8 (SD=15.05)
About Subjects
•
•
•
•
•
•
Married (n=120, 50.2%)
High School Education (49.9%)
Employed (n=134, 56.1%)
Private Health Insurance (n=140)
Medicare (n=68)
Veterans Coverage (n= 39)
Effectiveness of the Study
•
•
Attributes of health care important to consumers in the study are consistent with findings from other research.
Few investigators have asked consumers about the importance of nursing care in their views of quality. •
Other studies have not reported the importance of the consumers place on teaching by nurses.
•
Health Care Value/Value-Based Care
•
Cost Saving vs. Quality Care
Health Care
Consumerism
Has Arrived!
•
Workforce Engagement
•
Technology/Wearable Devices
Study Conclusions
•
The importance that consumers place on teaching by the nurse was emphasized, particularly among people with less education, low income levels, and chronic illnesses.
References
•
Doug Smith, M. M. (2015, February). Healthcare Trends 2015. Retrieved from www.besmith.com: https://www.besmith.com/thoughtleadership/white-papers/healthcare-trends-2015
•
Oermann, M. H., & Templin, T. (2000). Important Attributes of Quality
Health Care: Consumer Perspectives. Journal of Nursing Scholarship,
32(2), 167.
•
Rubinson, J. J. (2010). Research Techniques for the Health Sciences;
Fourth Edition. San Francisco, CA: Person Education Inc.
Health
Care
Nicole Bertram & LaWanda Frazier
HCS/465
May 5, 2015
Bryan Alexander
Table of Contents
•
•
•
Background:
•
Summary
•
Effect on Consumers’ Perspectives
Methodology:
•
Overview of Data Collection
•
Validity and Reliability
Results:
•
Qualitative and Quantitative Aspects
•
•
•
Descriptive Statistics & Inferential Statistics
Effectiveness of the Study
Conclusions:
•
Future Trends of Health Care Research and Consumerism
Background
Extensive research has been done to define and measure health care quality, yet little has been done to address the consumers’ perspective of high-quality health care.
Summary
•
•
Relationship of quality of care
•
Provider/Patient care
•
Access of care
Nursing knowledge
•
•
•
Nursing skills
Patient Demographics
•
Chronic illness
•
Census tracts
Consumer survey
Effect on Consumer Perspective
•
Attributes of health care important to consumers
•
Access to care
•
Coordination of services
•
Education
•
Being treated with respect
•
Waiting times for appointments
Overview of Data Collection
•
•
Participants completed surveys
•
Quality Health Care Questionnaire (QHCQ).
•
SF-36
Midwestern Area
•
Urban and Suburban area
•
Over 18 years of age
•
Not hospitalized within last 6 months
Validity and Reliability
•
•
Validity
•
Surveys
•
Previous studies
Reliability
•
239 consumers recruited
•
Results compared to other studies
Results
•
Most important indicators of high quality nursing care:
•
Communication with nurses
•
Spending enough time (not rushed)
•
Having nurses who are up-to-date and well informed
•
•
Nurse ability and willingness to educate patients
Ratings differed by race, age, education level, income, and health status
Table 1. QHCQ Factor Score Means by Race
Caucasian
Factor
M(SD)
Medical Care
Quality
African
American
M(SD)
F
51.4 (6.2)
48.2 (8.4)
9.95
Teaching by
Nurses
48.9 (10.5)
52.6 (8.6)
6.77
Provider
Competence
49.5 (10.7)
51.9 (7.3)
2.82
Choice of
Provider
49.2 (9.7)
51.3 (10.5)
2.20
Nurse-Patient
Interaction
50.1 (9.7)
50.2 (10.6)
0.03
Convenience of Appointment
48.5 (9.8
53.5 (9.9)
12.24
Table 2. Correlation of QHCQ Factor Scores with Health Status and Demographic
Variables
*p < .05
**p <.01
Medical Care
Teaching by
Nurses
Provider
Competence
Choice of
Provider
Nurse-Patient
Interaction
Convenience of
Appointments
Physical Functioning
.124
-.057
.036
.113
-.049
-.150*
Role Limitations
(Physical)
-.024
-.034
-.004
.106
-.132*
-.049
Pain
.082
-.009
-.023
.053
-.033
-.042
Vitality
.059
-.069
-.058
.127
-.130
-.089
Social Functioning
.093
-.061
-.038
-.021
-.146*
-.126
Role limitations
(emotional)
.065
-.161*
.001
.051
.022
-.024
Mental Health
.127
-.160
.016
.005
-.085
-.096
General Health
.050
-2.74**
.034
.144*
-.058
-.162*
Number of Chronic
Illnesses
-.067
.250**
-.055
.237**
-.003
.135*
Age
.034
-.130*
-.096
-.330**
-.150*
.100
Education
.224**
-.190**
-.113
.063
.063
-.248**
Income
.204**
-.250**
-.154*
-.030
.061
-.260**
Results
Qualitative and Quantitative Aspects
Descriptive Statistics
•
Factor analysis
•
Factor scores were standardized to mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10
Sample Includes
Inferential Statistics
• 149 Women (63.1%)
• 87 Men (36.9%)
•
Generalization
Age Range
•
Predictions
• 18yrs-92yrs
• Mean age 50.8 (SD=15.05)
About Subjects
•
•
•
•
•
•
Married (n=120, 50.2%)
High School Education (49.9%)
Employed (n=134, 56.1%)
Private Health Insurance (n=140)
Medicare (n=68)
Veterans Coverage (n= 39)
Effectiveness of the Study
•
•
Attributes of health care important to consumers in the study are consistent with findings from other research.
Few investigators have asked consumers about the importance of nursing care in their views of quality. •
Other studies have not reported the importance of the consumers place on teaching by nurses.
•
Health Care Value/Value-Based Care
•
Cost Saving vs. Quality Care
Health Care
Consumerism
Has Arrived!
•
Workforce Engagement
•
Technology/Wearable Devices
Study Conclusions
•
The importance that consumers place on teaching by the nurse was emphasized, particularly among people with less education, low income levels, and chronic illnesses.
References
•
Doug Smith, M. M. (2015, February). Healthcare Trends 2015. Retrieved from www.besmith.com: https://www.besmith.com/thoughtleadership/white-papers/healthcare-trends-2015
•
Oermann, M. H., & Templin, T. (2000). Important Attributes of Quality
Health Care: Consumer Perspectives. Journal of Nursing Scholarship,
32(2), 167.
•
Rubinson, J. J. (2010). Research Techniques for the Health Sciences;
Fourth Edition. San Francisco, CA: Person Education Inc.