A randomized trial of four patient satisfaction questionnaires.

BACKGROUND Patient satisfaction surveys are increasingly used by hospitals. Many questionnaires are available, but little evidence exists to guide the choice of the most suitable instrument. OBJECTIVE To compare the acceptability and patient perceptions of 4 patient satisfaction questionnaires. RESEARCH DESIGN Randomized trial of 4 satisfaction questionnaires: Picker, Patient Judgment System (PJS), Sequs, and a locally developed Lausanne questionnaire. SUBJECTS Patients discharged from 2 Swiss teaching hospitals (n = 2850). MEASURES Response rates, missing data, completion time, and patient ratings of the questionnaire (5-point agree-disagree scale). RESULTS Response rates were similar across instruments (Picker: 70%, PJS: 71%, Sequs: 68%, Lausanne: 73%; P= 0.27). The Picker questionnaire had the most missing responses (mean per item: Picker: 3.1%, PJS: 1.9%, Sequs: 1.6%, Lausanne: 1.1%; P<0.001) and took the longest to complete (minutes: Picker: 19.3, PJS: 12.5, Sequs: 13.4, Lausanne: 13.1; P<0.001), but the fewest patients indicated that the questionnaire failed to address at least 1 important aspect of the hospital stay (Picker: 28.2%, PJS: 38.8%, Sequs: 39.1%, Lausanne: 28.9%; P<0.001). Patient evaluations of the questionnaires were generally similar; the most favorable assessment was chosen by approximately half of the respondents (average of 10 items: Picker: 46.5%, PJS: 46.2%, Sequs: 47.4%, Lausanne: 48.2%; P= 0.60). Key survey results differed considerably by questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS No questionnaire emerged as uniformly better than the others in terms of acceptability and patient evaluations. All 4 could be used for patient satisfaction surveys.