BACKGROUND: Actionable feedback from patients after a clinic visit can help inform ways to better deliver patient-centered care. A 2-word assessment may serve as a proxy for lengthy post-visit questionnaires. We tested the use of a 2-word assessment in an outpatient hand clinic. METHODS: New patients were asked to provide a 2-word assessment of the following: (1) their physician; (2) their overall experience; and (3) recommendations for improvement and their likelihood to recommend (LTR) after their clinic visit. Sentiment analysis was used to categorize results into positive, neutral, or negative sentiment. Recommendations for improvement were classified into physician issue, system issue, or neither. We evaluated the relationship between LTR status, sentiment, actionable improvement opportunities, and classification (physician issue, system issue, or neither). Recommendations for improvement were classified into themes based on prior literature. RESULTS: Sixty-seven (97.1%) patients noted positive sentiment toward their physician; 67 (97.1%) noted positive sentiment toward their overall experience. About 31% of improvement recommendations were system-based, 5.9% were physician-based, and 62.7% were neither. Patients not LTR were more likely to leave actionable opportunities for improvement than those LTR (P = .01). Recommendations for improvement were classified into predetermined themes relating to: (1) physician interaction; (2) check-in process; (3) facilities; (4) unnecessary visit; and (5) appointment delays. CONCLUSION: Patients not likely to recommend provided actionable opportunities for improvement using a simple 2-word assessment. Implementation of a 2-word assessment in a hand clinic can be used to obtain actionable, real-time patient feedback that can inform operational change and improve the patient experience.

BACKGROUND: Surgical outreach trips to low- and middle-income countries have been increasing. Outcome collection on these trips, however, has been inconsistent and often incomplete. We conducted a qualitative study of surgeons, administrators, and patients to identify the barriers and facilitators to outcome collection on hand surgery outreach trips to Hospital 175 in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. METHODS: A purposive sample of surgeons, administrators, and patients from Hospital 175 were interviewed about their beliefs regarding outcome collection. We used a semi-structured interview guide based on the Theoretical Domains Framework to systematically explore barriers and facilitators. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using content analysis. Beliefs underlying similar responses were identified and aggregated to describe barriers and facilitators of outcome measurement. RESULTS: Twelve surgeons and administrative staff (3 visiting and 9 local) and 5 patients were interviewed before saturation was achieved. All stakeholders believed outcome collection on hand surgery outreach trips is important. Barriers identified were primarily related to environmental context and resources (eg, cost of returning) and memory, attention, and decision process (eg, difficulty in remembering patient follow-up intervals). The most commonly identified barriers address the distance patients live from the hospital/clinic, the resources required for them to return, and the lack of an organized system to assist in follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple barriers to outcome collection exist at Hospital 175 in Vietnam. Understanding these barriers informs context-specific implementation approaches to collect outcomes on hand surgery outreach trips, which may improve the safety and quality of care provided.

Purpose

A question prompt list (QPL) is a tool that lists possible questions a patient may want to ask their surgeon. Its purpose is to improve patient-physician communication and increase patient engagement. Although QPLs have been developed in other specialties, one does not exist for hand conditions. We sought to develop a QPL for use in the hand surgery clinic using a mixed-methods design.

Methods

We drafted a QPL based on prior work outside of hand surgery and then used an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design (both qualitative and quantitative methods) to finalize the QPL. Qualitative evaluation included both a written questionnaire completed by a patient advisory board, hand therapists, and hand surgeons, as well as cognitive interviews conducted with clinic patients using the tool. Revisions to the QPL were made after each phase of qualitative analysis. The final QPL was then evaluated quantitatively using the system usability score (SUS) questionnaire to assess its usability.

Results

A patient advisory board consisting of 6 patients, 5 hand therapists, and 6 hand surgeons completed the written questionnaire. Thirteen patients completed a cognitive interview of the QPL. We completed a content analysis of the qualitative data and incorporated the findings into the QPL. Twenty patients then reviewed the final QPL pamphlet and completed the SUS questionnaire. The resulting SUS score of 78.8 indicated above-average usability of the QPL tool.

Conclusions

The QPL developed in this study, from the perspective of multiple stakeholders, provides a usable tool to engage and prompt patients in asking questions during their visit with their hand surgeon with the potential to improve communication and patient-centered care.

Clinical relevance

This study provides clinicians with a QPL developed for use in the hand surgery clinic setting, aimed at facilitating more thorough patient-provider discussion.