3 1/2 hours, according to a study. After that, patient satisfaction scores plummet. I’m surprised the scores didn’t drop sooner than that.
To help with patient satisfaction, hospitals are resorting to a time-tested marketing tactic. Underpromise and overdeliver:
Basically, the docs calculated the mean time it took to get through the ER for a given test or procedure “” then added 20% when they told patients what to expect. In a standard patient satisfaction survey, all nine variables related to wait times improved after the ER adopted this policy (the improvement was statistically significant for five of the variables).
Some hospitals have signs up informing patients how long the wait is for certain tests. I don’t know why this hadn’t been thought of sooner.
Related posts:
- Should patient satisfaction influence physician compensation?
- Are patients really customers?
- Are doctors pressured to prescribe opiate drugs?
- ER waits: The NY Times is half-right
- My take: Colon cleansing, patient satisfaction
- My take: Diagnosis, Big Dig, ED waits
- Patient wait times vs time spent with the physician
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 2 comments }
we post our wait times online, we feel it’s that important:
http://www.pamf.org/home.cfm
You (and the WSJ authors) should probably make clear that the time interval they correlated with satisfaction was **total length of stay** and not the “wait.” Most folks will interpret this stat as people in the “waiting room” for 3-1/2 hours. Yeah, I’d be dissatisfied, too.
The more significant stat re: pt satisfaction is door-to-doctor time. Maybe there’s a study in it for us, there!
Comments on this entry are closed.