Search

Objective The measurement of patients’ experience is an important performance indicator of health care service quality. A reliable and validated instrument to elicit patients’ experience is an important step. This study aimed to develop a generic instrument to elicit patients’ experience in specialist outpatient clinic provision with a rigorous and systematic methodology. Design The instrument framework was developed according to findings of a literature review, patient focus group discussions, individual patient in-depth interviews and expert discussion. The framework was tested for psychometric performance with a cross-sectional telephone survey in terms of practicality, validity, reliability and responsiveness. Setting 26 Public specialist outpatient clinics in Hong Kong were selected. Participants Cantonese speaking patients aged 18 or above. Intervention(s): None. Main outcome measure(s): A validated generic patient experience questionnaire measuring Specialist Outpatient Service (SOPEQ). Results A proportional sample total of 513 patients from 26 specialist outpatient clinics were recruited, response rate of 56%. The findings indicated that the instrument is practicable and concise. A structure of nine dimensions with 47 items structure was confirmed based on exploratory factor analysis and content validity. These items showed satisfactory internal reliability consistency (α = 0.793) and test–retest reliability ranged from 0.618 to 0.829. Conclusions The SOPEQ was established with satisfactory psychometric properties. A valid and reliable measure to evaluate patients’ experience is an important step in providing valuable input from patients’ perspective for policy makers to improve patient-centred services. It also serves as a platform to engage patients and thereby, in improving health care quality and enhancing health outcomes.

Objective To assess public knowledge and expectations of the ways to assess doctors' competence to ensure patient safety. Design setting and participants Telephone survey of a random sample of 1000 non-institutionalized Hong Kong residents. Measures and results Only 5% of public were correct that doctors are not required to periodically be assessed, and 9% were correct that the doctors are not required to update knowledge and skills for renewing their license. These results echo international studies showing a low public knowledge of medical regulation. The public overwhelmingly felt a periodic assessment (92%) and requirements for continuous medical education (91%) were important processes for assuring doctors' competence. A high proportion of the public felt that lay representation in the Medical Council was insufficient. Conclusion There is a significant gap between public expectations and understanding of the existing medical regulation and the actual policies and practices. Despite a lack of public knowledge, the public thought it important to have an ongoing structured monitoring and assessment mechanism to assure doctors' competence. The public also expects a greater involvement in the regulatory processes as members of the Medical Council. There is a need to review and enhance the current regulatory system to meet public expectation and ensure accountability for the privilege and trust granted by the State in professional self-regulation. In the context of our complex health system, a thorough understanding on the dynamic interactions between different institutions and their complementary roles in a meta-regulatory framework is required in assuring patient safety.