JACR study explores potential bias in patient experience scores and how providers can respond

There are a few modifiable factors providers can address to improve patient experience scores, according to a new analysis published in the Journal of the American College of Radiology.

Such metrics are increasingly important in both measuring healthcare quality and reimbursement. However, they may be subject to bias, with factors such as physician gender influencing a consumer’s feedback.

Radiation oncology experts in New York recently set out to explore this issue, utilizing retrospective data across two large, multisite academic cancer centers. They found that demographic characteristics of docs did not impact scores, though one modifiable factor bubbled to the surface.

Oncology practices aiming to improve patient experience scores may wish to focus their attention on improving wait times for patients,” Deborah Marshall, MD, with the Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and co-authors wrote March 2. “Although a difference in patient experience scores on the basis of physician gender was not observed, such bias is likely to be complex, and further research is needed to characterize its effects.”

Researchers utilized data from nearly 2,900 individuals who completed patient experience surveys between 2017-2019. They tracked patient-reported factors including physician characteristics, practice setting and wait times. Experience scores were “generally high,” the authors noted, with more than 90% of respondents answering 5 of 5 on the four survey items. Gender was not associated with receiving a higher score for likelihood to recommend, nor physician friendliness, explanation or concern. But rating the wait time as “good” was the strongest independent predictor of higher experience scores, the authors noted.

Marshall et al. labeled this finding as “reason for optimism” around policy decisions that emphasize patient experience metrics.

With the introduction of novel payment models that place increased focus on the patient experience, it is important to understand the determinants of these constructs to avoid inadvertently making changes that lead to biased reimbursement,” the authors advised. “Ultimately, bringing financial incentives into line with measures of quality and patient experience has the potential to increase the value of healthcare services, carrying benefits both for patients and for the health system as a whole.”

The findings come after another recent study determined that interventional radiologists scored highly on patient experience surveys, achieving scores similar to other physician types.

Marty Stempniak

Marty Stempniak has covered healthcare since 2012, with his byline appearing in the American Hospital Association's member magazine, Modern Healthcare and McKnight's. Prior to that, he wrote about village government and local business for his hometown newspaper in Oak Park, Illinois. He won a Peter Lisagor and Gold EXCEL awards in 2017 for his coverage of the opioid epidemic. 

Around the web

The patient, who was being cared for in the ICU, was not accompanied or monitored by nursing staff during his exam, despite being sedated.

The nuclear imaging isotope shortage of molybdenum-99 may be over now that the sidelined reactor is restarting. ASNC's president says PET and new SPECT technologies helped cardiac imaging labs better weather the storm.

CMS has more than doubled the CCTA payment rate from $175 to $357.13. The move, expected to have a significant impact on the utilization of cardiac CT, received immediate praise from imaging specialists.