Video: Every Case Tells a Story| Webinar: ACR/CHEST ILD Guidelines in Practice

An official publication of the ACR and the ARP serving rheumatologists and rheumatology professionals

  • Conditions
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout and Crystalline Arthritis
    • Myositis
    • Osteoarthritis and Bone Disorders
    • Pain Syndromes
    • Pediatric Conditions
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Sjögren’s Disease
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
    • Systemic Sclerosis
    • Vasculitis
    • Other Rheumatic Conditions
  • FocusRheum
    • ANCA-Associated Vasculitis
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Guidance
    • Clinical Criteria/Guidelines
    • Ethics
    • Legal Updates
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence
      • Other ACR meetings
      • EULAR/Other
    • Research Rheum
  • Drug Updates
    • Analgesics
    • Biologics/DMARDs
  • Practice Support
    • Billing/Coding
    • EMRs
    • Facility
    • Insurance
    • QA/QI
    • Technology
    • Workforce
  • Opinion
    • Patient Perspective
    • Profiles
    • Rheuminations
      • Video
    • Speak Out Rheum
  • Career
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Awards
    • Career Development
  • ACR
    • ACR Home
    • ACR Convergence
    • ACR Guidelines
    • Journals
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
    • From the College
    • Events/CME
    • President’s Perspective
  • Search

What Do Your Patients Think About You?

Kathleen Louden  |  Issue: May 2012  |  May 9, 2012

E-mail is a popular choice for survey distribution because of its low cost and rapid feedback. Web-based survey tools such as SurveyMonkey allow free or inexpensive e-mail surveys, with costs depending on the number of questions, responses, and other features.

Some survey leaders still use postal surveys, because they believe they give the patient time to formulate an impression of the visit and they encourage greater honesty when done outside the office visit, Woodcock says.

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

The response rate, however, tends to be lower for mail-based surveys than in-office surveys. Although survey response rates vary widely depending on many factors, one estimate is approximately 75% for in-office surveys vs. 30% for mailed surveys (or 45% with a reminder).5 Dr. King says the response rates for mail surveys from his health system’s vendor range from 5% to 80% depending on the provider being rated.

To increase survey response rates, he recommends telling all new patients at their first visit to fill out the satisfaction survey if they get one.

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

“The most important thing is to create buy-in among patients and staff by demonstrating that patient satisfaction is very important,” Dr. King says. “We tell them we’re very interested in change and making our practice as good as possible.”

Charles M. King II, MD

The most important thing is to create buy-in among patients and staff by demonstrating that patient satisfaction is very important. We tell them we’re very interested in change and making our practice as good as possible.

—Charles M. King II, MD

Questions to Ask

Before you develop a survey, Dr. Hong recommends that you define your goal. Is it to confirm that you are providing good service or to improve service? Decide if the survey will assess the most recent visit or care over time. Also, get staff input in creating the survey.

“Patient satisfaction depends on a whole-practice approach,” Hertz says. “Engage the staff by talking with them before you send the survey.”

He recommends not only getting staff suggestions of questions to ask patients but also telling staff members what elements you plan to measure on the survey. “You will see change instantaneously because they want good feedback,” Hertz says.

Patient-satisfaction surveys typically address these areas:

  • Convenience or access to care (such as how quickly the phone was answered, ease of getting an appointment, and waiting time at the office);
  • Friendliness and helpfulness of staff; and
  • The physician interaction (took adequate time with the patient, explained information clearly, and answered questions thoroughly).

An overall assessment should complete the survey. Woodcock recommends including “How satisfied were you with your visit?” and ending with “How likely are you to refer a friend or relative to us?”

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 | Single Page
Share: 

Filed under:Practice SupportQuality Assurance/Improvement Tagged with:drugMedicarepatient satisfactionpatient surveysPractice ManagementQualityrheumatologist

Related Articles

    How Non-Physician Providers Can Help Your Practice

    November 17, 2017

    New data shows that both private and public rheumatology practices benefit financially by hiring non-physician providers (NPPs). But when should practices hire NPPs?

    Rheumatology & The Gender Pay Gap

    September 8, 2017

    On average, male rheumatologists earn 16.2%—or $38,493—more than female rheumatologists. Although the data seem jarring, a closer look at it is needed to truly understand the pay gap…

    Patient Satisfaction Scores—Do They Matter?

    April 26, 2018

    You see a patient for the first time to establish care for Sjögren’s disease. She complains of dry eyes, dry mouth and diffuse arthralgias. You do not appreciate any synovitis on physical exam. Of note, you are the fourth rheumatologist she has seen during the past year. Toward the end of the clinic visit, she…

    Speak Out Rheum: Are Independent Measures of Patient Satisfaction Reliable?

    May 1, 2014

    Patient survey questionnaires, metrics to gauge physician performance may not be trustworthy indicators of quality of patient care

  • About Us
  • Meet the Editors
  • Issue Archives
  • Contribute
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1931-3268 (print). ISSN 1931-3209 (online).
  • DEI Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences