Factors that shape the patient's hospital experience and satisfaction with lower limb arthroplasty: an exploratory thematic analysis.

OBJECTIVE: It is generally accepted that the patients' hospital experience can influence their overall satisfaction with the outcome of lower limb arthroplasty; however, little is known about the factors that shape the hospital experience. The aim of this study was to develop an understanding of what patients like and do not like about their hospital experience with a view to providing insight into where service improvements could have the potential to improve the patient experience and their satisfaction, and whether they would recommend the procedure. DESIGN: A mixed methods (quan-QUAL) approach. SETTING: Large regional teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: 216 patients who had completed a postoperative postal questionnaire at 12 months following total knee or total hip arthroplasty. OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall satisfaction with the outcome of surgery, whether to recommend the procedure to another and the rating of patient hospital experience. Free text comments on the best and worst aspects of their hospital stay were evaluated using qualitative thematic analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 77% of patients were satisfied with their surgery, 79% reported a good-excellent hospital experience and 85% would recommend the surgery to another. Qualitative analysis revealed clear themes relating to communication, pain relief and the process experience. Comments on positive aspects of the hospital experience were related to feeling well informed and consulted about their care. Comments on the worst aspects of care were related to being made to wait without explanation, moved to different wards and when they felt invisible to the healthcare staff caring for them. CONCLUSIONS: Positive patient experiences were closely linked to effective patient-health professional interactions and logistics of the hospital processes. Within arthroplasty services, the patient experience of healthcare could be enhanced by further attention to concepts of patient-centred care. Practical examples of this include more focus on developing staff-patient communication and the avoidance of 'boarding' procedures.

Assessing treatment outcomes using a single question: the net promoter score.

Satisfaction with care is important to both patients and to those who pay for it. The Net Promoter Score (NPS), widely used in the service industries, has been introduced into the NHS as the 'friends and family test'; an overarching measure of patient satisfaction. It assesses the likelihood of the patient recommending the healthcare received to another, and is seen as a discriminator of healthcare performance. We prospectively assessed 6186 individuals undergoing primary lower limb joint replacement at a single university hospital to determine the Net Promoter Score for joint replacements and to evaluate which factors contributed to the response. Achieving pain relief (odds ratio (OR) 2.13, confidence interval (CI) 1.83 to 2.49), the meeting of pre-operative expectation (OR 2.57, CI 2.24 to 2.97), and the hospital experience (OR 2.33, CI 2.03 to 2.68) are the domains that explain whether a patient would recommend joint replacement services. These three factors, combined with the type of surgery undertaken (OR 2.31, CI 1.68 to 3.17), drove a predictive model that was able to explain 95% of the variation in the patient's recommendation response. Though intuitively similar, this 'recommendation' metric was found to be materially different to satisfaction responses. The difference between THR (NPS 71) and TKR (NPS 49) suggests that no overarching score for a department should be used without an adjustment for case mix. However, the Net Promoter Score does measure a further important dimension to our existing metrics: the patient experience of healthcare delivery.

What determines patient satisfaction with surgery? A prospective cohort study of 4709 patients following total joint replacement.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the factors which influence patient satisfaction with surgical services and to explore the relationship between overall satisfaction, satisfaction with specific facets of outcome and measured clinical outcomes (patient reported outcome measures (PROMs)). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Single National Health Service (NHS) teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: 4709 individuals undergoing primary lower limb joint replacement over a 4-year period (January 2006-December 2010). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall patient satisfaction, clinical outcomes as measured by PROMs (Oxford Hip or Knee Score, SF-12), satisfaction with five specific aspects of surgical outcome, attitudes towards further surgery, length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Overall patient satisfaction was predicted by: (1) meeting preoperative expectations (OR 2.62 (95% CI 2.24 to 3.07)), (2) satisfaction with pain relief (2.40 (2.00 to 2.87)), (3) satisfaction with the hospital experience (1.7 (1.45 to 1.91)), (4) 12 months (1.08 (1.05 to 1.10)) and (5) preoperative (0.95 (0.93 to 0.97)) Oxford scores. These five factors contributed to a model able to correctly predict 97% of the variation in overall patient satisfaction response. The factors having greatest effect were the degree to which patient expectations were met and satisfaction with pain relief; the Oxford scores carried little weight in the algorithm. Various factors previously reported to influence clinical outcomes such as age, gender, comorbidities and length of postoperative hospital stay did not help explain variation in overall patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Three factors broadly determine the patient's overall satisfaction following lower limb joint arthroplasty; meeting preoperative expectations, achieving satisfactory pain relief, and a satisfactory hospital experience. Pain relief and expectations are managed by clinical teams; however, a fractured access to surgical services impacts on the patient's hospital experience which may reduce overall satisfaction. In the absence of complications, how we deliver healthcare may be of key importance along with the specifics of what we deliver, which has clear implications for units providing surgical services.

Biomechanics of knife stab attacks.

Equipment, materials and methods for the measurement of the biomechanical parameters governing knife stab attacks have been developed and data have been presented that are relevant to the improvement of standards for the testing of stab-resistant materials. A six-camera Vicon motion analysis system was used to measure velocity, and derive energy and momentum during the approach phase of the attack and a specially developed force-measuring knife was used to measure three-dimensional forces and torque during the impact phase. The body segments associated with the knife were modelled as a series of rigid segments: trunk, upper arm, forearm and hand. The velocities of these segments, together with knowledge of the mass distribution from biomechanical tables, allowed the calculation of the individual segment energy and momentum values. The instrumented knife measured four components of load: axial force (along the length of the blade), cutting force (parallel to the breadth of the blade), lateral force (across the blade) and torque (twisting action) using foil strain gauges. Twenty volunteers were asked to stab a target with near maximal effort. Three styles of stab were used: a short thrust forward, a horizontal style sweep around the body and an overhand stab. These styles were chosen based on reported incidents, providing more realistic data than had previously existed. The 95th percentile values for axial force and energy were 1885 N and 69 J, respectively. The ability of current test methods to reproduce the mechanical parameters measured in human stab attacks has been assessed. It was found that current test methods could reproduce the range of energy and force values measured in the human stab attacks, although the simulation was not accurate in some respects. Non-axial force and torque values were also found to be significant in the human tests, but these are not reproduced in the standard mechanical tests.