Feedback preferences of patients, professionals and health insurers in integrated head and neck cancer care

Lydia F. J. van Overveld; Robert P. Takes; Thomas W. Vijn; Joze C. C. Braspenning; Jan P. de Boer; John J. A. Brouns; Rolf J. Bun; Boukje A. C. van Dijk; Judith A. W. F. Dortmans; Emilie A. C. Dronkers; Robert J. J. van Es; Frank J. P. Hoebers; Arvid Kropveld; Johannes A. Langendijk; Ton P. M. Langeveld; Sjoukje F. Oosting; Hendrik P. Verschuur; Jan G. A. M. de Visscher; Stijn van Weert; Matthias A. W. Merkx; Ludi E. Smeele; Rosella P. M. G. Hermens

doi:10.1111/hex.12567

Feedback preferences of patients, professionals and health insurers in integrated head and neck cancer care

Lydia F. J. van Overveld^*, Robert P. Takes, Thomas W. Vijn, Joze C. C. Braspenning, Jan P. de Boer, John J. A. Brouns, Rolf J. Bun, Boukje A. C. van Dijk, Judith A. W. F. Dortmans, Emilie A. C. Dronkers, Robert J. J. van Es, Frank J. P. Hoebers, Arvid Kropveld, Johannes A. Langendijk, Ton P. M. Langeveld, Sjoukje F. Oosting, Hendrik P. Verschuur, Jan G. A. M. de Visscher, Stijn van Weert, Matthias A. W. MerkxLudi E. Smeele, Rosella P. M. G. Hermens

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

4 Citations (Web of Science)

Abstract

BackgroundAudit and feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes are the most often used interventions to change behaviour of professionals and improve quality of health care. However, limited information is available regarding preferred feedback for patients, professionals and health insurers.

ObjectiveInvestigate the (differences in) preferences of receiving feedback between stakeholders, using the Dutch Head and Neck Audit as an example.

MethodsA total of 37 patients, medical specialists, allied health professionals and health insurers were interviewed using semi-structured interviews. Questions focussed on: Why, On what aspects and How do you prefer to receive feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes?

ResultsAll stakeholders mentioned that feedback can improve health care by creating awareness, enabling self-reflection and reflection on peers or colleagues, and by benchmarking to others. Patients prefer feedback on the actual professional practice that matches the health care received, whereas medical specialists and health insurers are interested mainly in health care outcomes. All stakeholders largely prefer a bar graph. Patients prefer a pie chart for patient-reported outcomes and experiences, while Kaplan-Meier survival curves are preferred by medical specialists. Feedback should be simple with firstly an overview, and 1-4 times a year sent by e-mail. Finally, patients and health professionals are cautious with regard to transparency of audit data.

ConclusionsThis exploratory study shows how feedback preferences differ between stakeholders. Therefore, tailored reports are recommended. Using this information, effects of audit and feedback can be improved by adapting the feedback format and contents to the preferences of stakeholders.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1275-1288
Number of pages	14
Journal	Health Expectations
Volume	20
Issue number	6
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12567
Publication status	Published - Dec 2017

Keywords

audit and feedback
feedback preferences
head and neck cancer
health care quality improvement
integrated health care
quality indicators
OF-LIFE INFORMATION
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
AUDIT
INDICATORS
IMPACT
INTERVENTIONS
PERFORMANCE
OUTCOMES
PROGRAM
CHOICE

Access to Document

10.1111/hex.12567

Cite this

van Overveld, L. F. J., Takes, R. P., Vijn, T. W., Braspenning, J. C. C., de Boer, J. P., Brouns, J. J. A., Bun, R. J., van Dijk, B. A. C., Dortmans, J. A. W. F., Dronkers, E. A. C., van Es, R. J. J., Hoebers, F. J. P., Kropveld, A., Langendijk, J. A., Langeveld, T. P. M., Oosting, S. F., Verschuur, H. P., de Visscher, J. G. A. M., van Weert, S., ... Hermens, R. P. M. G. (2017). Feedback preferences of patients, professionals and health insurers in integrated head and neck cancer care. Health Expectations, 20(6), 1275-1288. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12567

@article{471213b705014b45b184c4d130b122f1,

title = "Feedback preferences of patients, professionals and health insurers in integrated head and neck cancer care",

abstract = "BackgroundAudit and feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes are the most often used interventions to change behaviour of professionals and improve quality of health care. However, limited information is available regarding preferred feedback for patients, professionals and health insurers.ObjectiveInvestigate the (differences in) preferences of receiving feedback between stakeholders, using the Dutch Head and Neck Audit as an example.MethodsA total of 37 patients, medical specialists, allied health professionals and health insurers were interviewed using semi-structured interviews. Questions focussed on: Why, On what aspects and How do you prefer to receive feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes?ResultsAll stakeholders mentioned that feedback can improve health care by creating awareness, enabling self-reflection and reflection on peers or colleagues, and by benchmarking to others. Patients prefer feedback on the actual professional practice that matches the health care received, whereas medical specialists and health insurers are interested mainly in health care outcomes. All stakeholders largely prefer a bar graph. Patients prefer a pie chart for patient-reported outcomes and experiences, while Kaplan-Meier survival curves are preferred by medical specialists. Feedback should be simple with firstly an overview, and 1-4 times a year sent by e-mail. Finally, patients and health professionals are cautious with regard to transparency of audit data.ConclusionsThis exploratory study shows how feedback preferences differ between stakeholders. Therefore, tailored reports are recommended. Using this information, effects of audit and feedback can be improved by adapting the feedback format and contents to the preferences of stakeholders.",

keywords = "audit and feedback, feedback preferences, head and neck cancer, health care quality improvement, integrated health care, quality indicators, OF-LIFE INFORMATION, QUALITATIVE RESEARCH, AUDIT, INDICATORS, IMPACT, INTERVENTIONS, PERFORMANCE, OUTCOMES, PROGRAM, CHOICE",

author = "{van Overveld}, {Lydia F. J.} and Takes, {Robert P.} and Vijn, {Thomas W.} and Braspenning, {Joze C. C.} and {de Boer}, {Jan P.} and Brouns, {John J. A.} and Bun, {Rolf J.} and {van Dijk}, {Boukje A. C.} and Dortmans, {Judith A. W. F.} and Dronkers, {Emilie A. C.} and {van Es}, {Robert J. J.} and Hoebers, {Frank J. P.} and Arvid Kropveld and Langendijk, {Johannes A.} and Langeveld, {Ton P. M.} and Oosting, {Sjoukje F.} and Verschuur, {Hendrik P.} and {de Visscher}, {Jan G. A. M.} and {van Weert}, Stijn and Merkx, {Matthias A. W.} and Smeele, {Ludi E.} and Hermens, {Rosella P. M. G.}",

year = "2017",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1111/hex.12567",

language = "English",

volume = "20",

pages = "1275--1288",

journal = "Health Expectations",

issn = "1369-6513",

publisher = "Wiley",

number = "6",

}

van Overveld, LFJ, Takes, RP, Vijn, TW, Braspenning, JCC, de Boer, JP, Brouns, JJA, Bun, RJ, van Dijk, BAC, Dortmans, JAWF, Dronkers, EAC, van Es, RJJ, Hoebers, FJP, Kropveld, A, Langendijk, JA, Langeveld, TPM, Oosting, SF, Verschuur, HP, de Visscher, JGAM, van Weert, S, Merkx, MAW, Smeele, LE & Hermens, RPMG 2017, 'Feedback preferences of patients, professionals and health insurers in integrated head and neck cancer care', Health Expectations, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 1275-1288. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12567

TY - JOUR

T1 - Feedback preferences of patients, professionals and health insurers in integrated head and neck cancer care

AU - van Overveld, Lydia F. J.

AU - Takes, Robert P.

AU - Vijn, Thomas W.

AU - Braspenning, Joze C. C.

AU - de Boer, Jan P.

AU - Brouns, John J. A.

AU - Bun, Rolf J.

AU - van Dijk, Boukje A. C.

AU - Dortmans, Judith A. W. F.

AU - Dronkers, Emilie A. C.

AU - van Es, Robert J. J.

AU - Hoebers, Frank J. P.

AU - Kropveld, Arvid

AU - Langendijk, Johannes A.

AU - Langeveld, Ton P. M.

AU - Oosting, Sjoukje F.

AU - Verschuur, Hendrik P.

AU - de Visscher, Jan G. A. M.

AU - van Weert, Stijn

AU - Merkx, Matthias A. W.

AU - Smeele, Ludi E.

AU - Hermens, Rosella P. M. G.

PY - 2017/12

Y1 - 2017/12

N2 - BackgroundAudit and feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes are the most often used interventions to change behaviour of professionals and improve quality of health care. However, limited information is available regarding preferred feedback for patients, professionals and health insurers.ObjectiveInvestigate the (differences in) preferences of receiving feedback between stakeholders, using the Dutch Head and Neck Audit as an example.MethodsA total of 37 patients, medical specialists, allied health professionals and health insurers were interviewed using semi-structured interviews. Questions focussed on: Why, On what aspects and How do you prefer to receive feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes?ResultsAll stakeholders mentioned that feedback can improve health care by creating awareness, enabling self-reflection and reflection on peers or colleagues, and by benchmarking to others. Patients prefer feedback on the actual professional practice that matches the health care received, whereas medical specialists and health insurers are interested mainly in health care outcomes. All stakeholders largely prefer a bar graph. Patients prefer a pie chart for patient-reported outcomes and experiences, while Kaplan-Meier survival curves are preferred by medical specialists. Feedback should be simple with firstly an overview, and 1-4 times a year sent by e-mail. Finally, patients and health professionals are cautious with regard to transparency of audit data.ConclusionsThis exploratory study shows how feedback preferences differ between stakeholders. Therefore, tailored reports are recommended. Using this information, effects of audit and feedback can be improved by adapting the feedback format and contents to the preferences of stakeholders.

AB - BackgroundAudit and feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes are the most often used interventions to change behaviour of professionals and improve quality of health care. However, limited information is available regarding preferred feedback for patients, professionals and health insurers.ObjectiveInvestigate the (differences in) preferences of receiving feedback between stakeholders, using the Dutch Head and Neck Audit as an example.MethodsA total of 37 patients, medical specialists, allied health professionals and health insurers were interviewed using semi-structured interviews. Questions focussed on: Why, On what aspects and How do you prefer to receive feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes?ResultsAll stakeholders mentioned that feedback can improve health care by creating awareness, enabling self-reflection and reflection on peers or colleagues, and by benchmarking to others. Patients prefer feedback on the actual professional practice that matches the health care received, whereas medical specialists and health insurers are interested mainly in health care outcomes. All stakeholders largely prefer a bar graph. Patients prefer a pie chart for patient-reported outcomes and experiences, while Kaplan-Meier survival curves are preferred by medical specialists. Feedback should be simple with firstly an overview, and 1-4 times a year sent by e-mail. Finally, patients and health professionals are cautious with regard to transparency of audit data.ConclusionsThis exploratory study shows how feedback preferences differ between stakeholders. Therefore, tailored reports are recommended. Using this information, effects of audit and feedback can be improved by adapting the feedback format and contents to the preferences of stakeholders.

KW - audit and feedback

KW - feedback preferences

KW - head and neck cancer

KW - health care quality improvement

KW - integrated health care

KW - quality indicators

KW - OF-LIFE INFORMATION

KW - QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

KW - AUDIT

KW - INDICATORS

KW - IMPACT

KW - INTERVENTIONS

KW - PERFORMANCE

KW - OUTCOMES

KW - PROGRAM

KW - CHOICE

U2 - 10.1111/hex.12567

DO - 10.1111/hex.12567

M3 - Article

C2 - 28618147

VL - 20

SP - 1275

EP - 1288

JO - Health Expectations

JF - Health Expectations

SN - 1369-6513

IS - 6

ER -