A comparison of patient satisfaction when office-based procedures are performed by general surgery residents versus an attending surgeon.
prospective_cohort · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 30952442.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.surg.2019.02.009.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Patient satisfaction is an increasingly important quality metric nationwide. The impact that surgical trainees have on patient-reported satisfaction when they perform operations independently, however, has not been studied. We conducted a prospective study at a single academic institution from October 2016 to June 2017. An office-based, postprocedure survey was developed by adapting questions from the validated Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Surgical Care Survey. Top-box scoring was used to determine satisfaction for categorical questions and a comparison of the means was used for overall quality ratings (scale 0-10). Patients indicated whether their operation was completed by an attending surgeon or a postgraduate year 3 general surgery resident. The primary outcome measured was patient satisfaction with overall quality of care. Individual questions were grouped by phase of care and composite scores were measured as a secondary outcome. The survey response rate was 87.4% (n = 195). There were no differences in patient demographics or the types of procedures performed by residents or an attending surgeon. Excision of a soft tissue mass (ie, lipoma) accounted for 89.2% of all procedures performed (n = 174). There were no differences between preprocedure (resident = 92.5% vs attending = 94.2%) or postprocedure (resident = 95.3% vs attending = 97.7%) composite scores. There was, however, a significant difference in periprocedure satisfaction (resident = 78.7% vs attending = 90.7%, P = .02). There was no difference in overall ratings of quality of care given by patients who had their procedure performed by residents (9.8 ± 0.5) versus an attending surgeon (9.9 ± 0.3, P = .15). Finally, on adjusted analysis, resident care did not independently impact the likelihood of a "best possible care" rating for overall quality of care (odds ratio 0.84 ± 0.27, confidence interval 0.45-1.57, P = .58). Patient satisfaction was very high when residents independently performed minor surgery operations in an office-based setting. Of note, there was no difference in satisfaction with overall quality of care compared with an attending surgeon. This study demonstrates that high resident operative autonomy and patient satisfaction are not mutually exclusive goals when postgraduate year 3 residents perform office-based outpatient procedures.
Medical subject headings
- Ambulatory Surgical Procedures
- Clinical Competence
- Internship and Residency
- Outcome Assessment, Health Care
- Patient Satisfaction
- Professional Autonomy