Do 360-degree Feedback Survey Results Relate to Patient Satisfaction Measures?

• DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-3981-3
• Publication Date: 2014-10-06T16:34:42Z
• Authors: Michiel G. J. S. ...; David C. Ring; Paul J. Gregory; Harry E. Rubash; Larry Harmon
• Keywords: Credentialing; Interview

There is evidence that feedback from 360-degree surveys-combined with coaching-can improve physician team performance and quality of patient care. The Physicians Universal Leadership-Teamwork Skills Education (PULSE) 360 one such survey tool used to assess work colleagues' coworkers' perceptions a physician's leadership, teamwork, clinical practice style. Clinician & Group-Consumer Assessment Healthcare Providers System (CG-CAHPS), developed by the US Department Health Human Services serve as benchmark for health care, patients provide based on their recent experiences staff clinicians soon will be tied Medicare-based compensation participating physicians. Prior research has indicated coworkers often agree in assessment physicians' behavioral patterns. goal current study was determine whether 360-degree, also called multisource, provided could predict satisfaction/experience ratings. A significant relationship between these two forms enable physicians take more proactive approach reinforce strengths identify any improvement opportunities interactions reviewing members. An automated software process may faster, simpler, less resource-intensive than telephoning interviewing responses, it potentially facilitate rapid credentialing or leading greater fiscal professional development gains physicians.Our primary question if PULSE ratings correlate CG-CAHPS patients' overall satisfaction, recommendation physician, surgeon respect, clarity surgeon's explanation. Our secondary questions were scores additional composite Quality (eg, insight impact score, focus concerns leadership-teamwork index etc).We retrospectively analyzed existing data surveys well department initiative using questionnaires (Quality coworkers). Bivariate analyses conducted relationships inclusion variables multivariate linear stepwise regression best fitting predictive model ratings). In all higher order analyses, treated dependent variables, whereas served independent variables. This led identification most each CG-CAHPS' rating [1] satisfaction; [2] physician; [3] respect; [4] explanation) regressed which there bivariate relationship. Backward then remove unnecessary predictors changes variance explained without predictor.The score correlated satisfaction (0.50, p = 0.01), (0.58, 0.002), respect (0.74, < 0.001), impression explanation (0.69, 0.001). Additionally, (0.46, 0.019) (0.39, 0.05). Multivariate supported retention predictor surgeon, respect. Both retained Several other ratings, but none models post regression.The measures reaffirm members helpful information into how perceiving behavior vice versa. Furthermore, findings tentative support use team-based both patients. offer an effective obtain about directly reimbursement reputation bonuses incentivize better professionalism ie, "pay-for-professionalism." Further needed expand this line inquiry, interventions can scores, explain shared captured coworkers.