Skip to main content


Benchmarking patient satisfaction scores in a colorectal patient population

Surgical Endoscopy
Sandra L. Kavalukas, Rebeccah B. Baucom, Timothy M. Geiger, Molly M. Ford, Roberta L. Muldoon, Nicholas A. Cavin, Benjamin E. Killion, M. Benjamin Hopkins, Russell L. Rothman, David F. Penson, Alexander T. Hawkins
Wichtige Hinweise

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.



Healthcare reimbursement is rapidly moving away from a fee-for-service model toward value-based purchasing. An integral component of this new focus on quality is patient-centered outcomes. One metric used to define patient satisfaction is the Press Ganey Patient Satisfaction Survey. Data are lacking to accurately benchmark these scores based on diagnosis. We sought to identify if different colorectal disease processes affected a patient’s perception of their healthcare experience.


Adult colorectal patients seen between July 2015 and September 2016 in a tertiary hospital colorectal clinic were mailed a Press Ganey survey. Patients were stratified based on diagnosis: neoplasia, IBD, anorectal and benign colorectal disease. Survey scores were compared across the groups with adjustment for confounding variables.


312 patients responded and formed the cohort. The mean age was 61 (range 18–93) and 56% were women. The cohort breakdown was 38% neoplasia, 32% anorectal, 21% benign, and 9% IBD. In a multivariable model, there was a difference in PG scores by diagnosis; patients with neoplasia had higher Overall scores (β 10.2; Std Error 4.0; p = 0.01), Care Provider scores (β 8.5; Std Error 4.2; p = 0.04), Nurse Assistant scores (β 15.0; Std Error 5.7; p = 0.01), and Personal Issues scores (β 11.8; Std Error 5/0; p = 0.01).


Press Ganey scores were found to vary significantly. Patients with a neoplasia diagnosis reported higher overall satisfaction, Care Provider, Nurse Assistant, and Personal Issues scores. Adjustment for disease condition is important when assessing patient satisfaction as an indicator of quality and as a metric for reimbursement. This study adds to increasing evidence about bias in these scores.

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf Zusätzlich können Sie eine Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl in gedruckter Form beziehen – ohne Aufpreis.

Jetzt e.Med bestellen und 100 € sparen!

Weitere Produktempfehlungen anzeigen
Über diesen Artikel
  1. Sie können e.Med Chirurgie 14 Tage kostenlos testen (keine Print-Zeitschrift enthalten). Der Test läuft automatisch und formlos aus. Es kann nur einmal getestet werden.

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Mail Icon II Newsletter

Bestellen Sie unseren kostenlosen Newsletter Update Chirurgie und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.