The Use of Performance Improvement Methods to Enhance Emergency Department Patient Satisfaction in the United States: A Critical Review of the Literature and Suggestions for Future Research

Objectives: The authors reviewed the evidence on performance improvement methods for increasing emergency department (ED) patient satisfaction to provide evidence-based suggestions for clinical practice.
Methods: Data sources consisted of searches through MEDLINE, CINAHL, PSYCHINFO, Cochrane Library, and Emergency Medicine Abstracts and a manual search of references. Articles were included if they reported a performance improvement intervention targeting patient satisfaction in the ED setting. Articles on studies not conducted in the United States or that failed to provide enough details to allow critical evaluation of the study were excluded. Two authors used structured evaluation criteria to independently review each retained study.
Results: Nineteen articles met all selection criteria. Three studies found varying levels of support for multicomponent interventions, predominantly focused on implementation of clinical practice guidelines for specific presenting complaints and process redesign. Sixteen studies evaluated single-component interventions, with the following having at least one supportive study: using alternating patient assignment to provider teams rather than "zone"-based assignment, enhancing provider communication and customer service skills, incorporating information delivery interventions (e.g., pamphlets, video) that target patient expectations, using preformatted charts, and establishing ED-based observation units for specific conditions such as asthma and chest pain.
Conclusions: There is modest evidence supporting a range of performance improvement interventions for improving ED patient satisfaction. Further work is needed before specific, evidence-based recommendations can be made regarding which process changes are most effective. Recommendations are made for improving the quality of performance improvement efforts in the ED setting.     

Tobacco use following liver transplantation for alcoholic liver disease: an underestimated problem.

Alcohol and tobacco use commonly co-occur, with at least 90% of those with an alcohol problem also using tobacco. Thus, 3 years ago when we discovered higher rate of late deaths due to lung and oropharyngeal cancer in patients who had received a transplant for alcoholic liver disease (ALD), we hypothesized that these patients were continuing to expose themselves to tobacco after liver transplantation (post-LTX) and that this behavior was increasing their risk for cancer. We subsequently began a prospective investigation of post-LTX tobacco use in patients having undergone LTX for ALD (n = 172). For 33 recipients we had data starting from our first assessment at 3 months post-LTX and for this subgroup we report on the details of the timing of tobacco use resumption and the redevelopment of nicotine addiction. We found that on average more than 40% are smoking across all time periods. ALD recipients resume smoking early post-LTX, increase their consumption over time, and quickly become tobacco dependent. These data highlight an underrecognized serious health risk for these patients and demonstrate our need for more stringent clinical monitoring and intervention for tobacco use in the pre- and post-LTX periods.     

Data sources for measuring colorectal endoscopy use among Medicare enrollees.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of colorectal cancer test use vary widely by data source. Medicare claims offer one source for monitoring test use, but their utility has not been validated. We compared ascertainment of sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy between three data sources: self reports, Medicare claims, and medical records. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study population included Medicare enrollees residing in North Carolina (n = 561) who had participated in a telephone survey on colorectal cancer tests. Medicare claims were obtained for the 5 years preceding the survey (January 1, 1998 to December 31, 2002). Information about sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy procedures conducted in physician offices were abstracted from medical records. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, agreement, and kappa statistics were calculated using the medical record as the gold standard. Agreement on specific procedure type and purpose was also assessed. RESULTS: Agreement between claim and medical record regarding whether an endoscopic procedure had been done was high (over 90%). Agreement between self report and medical record and between self report and claim was good (79% and 74%, respectively). All three data sources adequately distinguished the type of procedure done. None of the data sources showed reliable levels of agreement regarding procedure purpose (screening or diagnostic). CONCLUSION: Medicare claims can provide accurate information on whether a patient has undergone colorectal endoscopy and may be more complete than physician medical records. Medicare claims cannot be used to distinguish screening from diagnostic tests. Recognizing this limitation, researchers who use Medicare claims to assess rates of colorectal testing should include both screening and diagnostic endoscopy procedures in their analyses.