PERFORMANCE OF THE PROVIDER SATISFACTION INVENTORY TO MEASURE PROVIDER SATISFACTION WITH DIABETES CARE Academic Article uri icon

  •  
  • Overview
  •  
  • Research
  •  
  • Identity
  •  
  • Additional Document Info
  •  
  • View All
  •  

abstract

  • OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate an inventory to measure provider satisfaction with diabetes management. METHODS: Using the Mayo Clinic Model of Care, a review of the literature, and expert input, we developed a 4-category (chronic disease management, collaborative team practice, outcomes, and supportive environment), 29-item, 7-point-per-item Provider Satisfaction Inventory (PSI). For evaluation of the PSI, we mailed the survey to 192 primary-care and specialized providers from 8 practice sites (of whom 60 primary-care providers were participating in either usual or planned diabetes care). The Cronbach a score was used to assess the instrument's internal reliability. Participating providers indicated satisfaction or dissatisfaction with management of chronic disease by responding to 29 statements. RESULTS: The response rate was 58%. In each category, the Cronbach a score ranged from 0.71 to 0.90. Providers expressed satisfaction with patient-physician relationships, with the contributions of the nurse educator to the team, and with physician leadership. Providers were dissatisfied with their ability to spend adequate time with the patient (3.6 +/- 1.4), their ability to give patients with diabetes necessary personal attention (4.1 +/- 1.2), the efficient passing of communication (4.3 +/- 1.2), and the opportunities for input to change practice (4.3 +/- 1.6). No statistically significant difference (P = 0.12) was found in mean total scores between planned care (5.0 +/- 0.5) and usual care (4.7 +/- 0.6) providers. Moreover, no significant differences were noted across practice sites. CONCLUSION: The PSI is a reliable and preliminarily valid instrument for measuring provider satisfaction with diabetes care. Use in research and quality improvement activities awaits further validation.

authors

  • Montori, Victor
  • Tweedy, Deborah A
  • Smith, Steven A
  • Vogelsang, Debra A
  • Schryver, Patricia G
  • Naessens, James M
  • Smith, Steven A

publication date

  • May 2002