wpostServer: http://css.washingtonpost.com/wpost

How patients judge what makes ‘excellent’ health care

at 09:03 AM ET, 05/22/2012

Alice Walton looks at a new study of 374 breast cancer patients, finding that the women’s opinions of care received didn’t necessarily line up with the quality of care provided:

Just over half of the women (55 percent) said they received “excellent” care. But most women — 88 percent — actually got care that was considered in line with the best current treatment guidelines.
The process of obtaining medical treatment had a great influence on how satisfied patients were. Many women (60 percent) who said they got excellent care also said the process of getting the care was excellent; but only about 16 percent of women who said they got less-than-excellent care said the process of getting the care was excellent. This suggests that the ease or difficulty of obtaining the treatment in the first place has a big impact on one’s experience of the whole process.
The way the women felt they were treated by medical personnel also affected the total experience. Women who said they got “excellent” care were more likely to say they had good communication with their doctor, knew which person to go to with questions, and received excellent care by the medical staff in general. Importantly, they also felt less mistrust of the medical system overall.

There are, perhaps, two ways to read this study. One is the conclusion that Walton draws, that “patients aren’t great at figuring out if they got excellent care.” We mix up extraneous factors with the one thing that really matters: The eventual, medical outcome.

The other way, however, would be to question whether the medical outcome is, in fact, the best metric to judge the quality of care provided. These women’s responses suggest that it isn’t: Patients put value on a high-quality treatment experience that includes open communication and ease of service. This could be especially true for a more invasive treatment such as the chemotherapy provided to the women in this study.

Loading...

Comments

Add your comment
 
Read what others are saying About Badges

    Blog Contributors

    Ezra Klein

    Ezra Klein

    Ezra Klein is the editor of Wonkblog and a columnist at the Washington Post, as well as a contributor to MSNBC and Bloomberg. His work focuses on domestic and economic policymaking, as well as the political system that’s constantly screwing it up. He really likes graphs, and is on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook. E-mail him here.

    Neil Irwin

    Neil Irwin

    Neil Irwin is a Washington Post columnist and the economics editor of Wonkblog. Each weekday morning his Econ Agenda column reports and explains the latest trends in economics, finance, and the policies that shape both. He is the author of “The Alchemists: Three Central Bankers and a World on Fire.” Follow him on Twitter here. Email him here.

    Sarah Kliff

    Sarah Kliff

    Sarah Kliff covers health policy, focusing on Medicare, Medicaid and the health reform law. She tries to fit in some reproductive health and education policy coverage, too, alongside an occasional hockey reference. Her work has appeared in Newsweek, Politico, and the BBC. She is on Twitter and Facebook.

    Brad Plumer

    Brad Plumer

    Brad Plumer is a reporter focusing on energy and environmental issues. He was previously an associate editor at The New Republic. Follow him on Twitter. Email him here.

    Dylan Matthews

    Dylan Matthews

    Dylan Matthews covers taxes, poverty, campaign finance, higher education, and all things data. He has also written for The New Republic, Salon, Slate, and The American Prospect. Follow him on Twitter here. Email him here.

    Section:/blogs/ezra-klein