Mike Kohut, Tracy Jalbuena, Rachel Alfiero, John DiPalazzo, Eric Anderson, Jasmine Bishop
{"title":"Net Promoter Score as a Reflection of Patients' Opinions About Telemedical Visits: A Mixed Methods Analysis.","authors":"Mike Kohut, Tracy Jalbuena, Rachel Alfiero, John DiPalazzo, Eric Anderson, Jasmine Bishop","doi":"10.1089/tmj.2024.0300","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> In order to assess patient experiences of telemedicine, researchers and administrators use the net promoter score (NPS), based on a likelihood to recommend (LTR) question. However, there is reason to doubt validity of this metric for this purpose. We assessed the degree to which the LTR question reflects actual patient preferences about telemedicine. <b>Methods:</b> Using data from a patient experience survey collected in Spring 2020, we compared LTR responses to open comments. Through content analysis, we transformed comments into categorical variables and used those variables in a multiple logistic regression model to predict LTR responses. We also thematically analyzed comments to further elucidate our results. <b>Results:</b> Only about half the comments mentioned telemedicine at all. Around 6% of comments were wholly incongruent with LTR responses. In many comments, ideas about telemedicine were semantically entangled with ideas about providers. Our logistic regression found strong associations between sentiments expressed in comments and LTR responses. However, comments about telemedicine were relatively poor predictors for LTR compared to comments about the provider. <b>Discussion:</b> NPS, which is included on many patient experience surveys used by health systems across the United States, has limitations for use as a measure of the acceptability of telemedicine for patients. Patients have more than telemedicine in mind when responding to the LTR question, and ratings conflate attitudes about providers, office policies, and staff with the telemedicine modality. More direct measures are necessary for meaningful research on the acceptability and usability of telemedicine for patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":54434,"journal":{"name":"Telemedicine and e-Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Telemedicine and e-Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2024.0300","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: In order to assess patient experiences of telemedicine, researchers and administrators use the net promoter score (NPS), based on a likelihood to recommend (LTR) question. However, there is reason to doubt validity of this metric for this purpose. We assessed the degree to which the LTR question reflects actual patient preferences about telemedicine. Methods: Using data from a patient experience survey collected in Spring 2020, we compared LTR responses to open comments. Through content analysis, we transformed comments into categorical variables and used those variables in a multiple logistic regression model to predict LTR responses. We also thematically analyzed comments to further elucidate our results. Results: Only about half the comments mentioned telemedicine at all. Around 6% of comments were wholly incongruent with LTR responses. In many comments, ideas about telemedicine were semantically entangled with ideas about providers. Our logistic regression found strong associations between sentiments expressed in comments and LTR responses. However, comments about telemedicine were relatively poor predictors for LTR compared to comments about the provider. Discussion: NPS, which is included on many patient experience surveys used by health systems across the United States, has limitations for use as a measure of the acceptability of telemedicine for patients. Patients have more than telemedicine in mind when responding to the LTR question, and ratings conflate attitudes about providers, office policies, and staff with the telemedicine modality. More direct measures are necessary for meaningful research on the acceptability and usability of telemedicine for patients.
期刊介绍:
Telemedicine and e-Health is the leading peer-reviewed journal for cutting-edge telemedicine applications for achieving optimal patient care and outcomes. It places special emphasis on the impact of telemedicine on the quality, cost effectiveness, and access to healthcare. Telemedicine applications play an increasingly important role in health care. They offer indispensable tools for home healthcare, remote patient monitoring, and disease management, not only for rural health and battlefield care, but also for nursing home, assisted living facilities, and maritime and aviation settings.
Telemedicine and e-Health offers timely coverage of the advances in technology that offer practitioners, medical centers, and hospitals new and innovative options for managing patient care, electronic records, and medical billing.