Background To achieve a high level of patient satisfaction, providers need to identify and address patients' expectations. However, providers' beliefs and attitudes regarding expectations, as well as how to manage them, are not well understood.
Methods The authors developed a survey to assess clinicians' awareness, attitudes, competence and performance with respect to patient expectations. The authors surveyed clinicians in four academic hospitals located in Denmark, Israel, the UK and the USA.
Results The authors collected 1004 questionnaires (79.9% response rate) from four hospitals in four countries spanning three continents. Overall, 88.8% of respondents stated that clinician awareness regarding patient expectations was moderate to low, with significant differences between countries (p<0.001). Although 89.4% of clinicians believed it was important to ask patients about expectations, only 16.1% reported actually asking (p<0.0001). Nurses were more likely than physicians to ask patients about expectations (20.1% vs 11.5%, p<0.001). Only 19.6% of respondents felt they had adequate training to handle patients' expectations. In multivariate analyses, clinicians with greater awareness and adequate training were more likely to ask patients about their expectations.
Conclusion While clinicians think it is important to ask patients about their expectations, they often fail to do so and consequently may not respond adequately. These results identify a ‘blind spot’ in clinicians' approach when attempting to address patient expectations and improve patient satisfaction, suggesting that healthcare organisations should take a more active role in increasing clinicians' awareness and initiating structured training programmes to cope with patient expectations.
- Patient expectations
- patient satisfaction
- patient-centred care
- quality improvement
- health services research
- patient safety
- medical error
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Funding This study was partially supported by the NHS South Central (UK). The funding was used for the travel expenses of RR to the UK (Oxford Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford) research site and to support the data analysis. NHS South Central was not involved in the study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, writing of the manuscript or in the decision to submit the publication.
Competing interests None.
Ethics approval The study protocol and survey instrument were approved by the Institutional Review Board of each one of the four participating hospitals: Denmark (Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus Sygehus); Israel (Assaf Harofeh Hospital, Zerifin); UK (Oxford Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford); and USA (Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston).
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data sharing statement Survey data are available from the corresponding author on request.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.