Patients' Ratings of Outpatient Visits in Different Practice Settings: Results From the Medical Outcomes Study

Haya R. Rubin, Barbara Gandek, William H. Rogers, Mark Kosinski, Colleen A. Mchorney, John E. Ware

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

To determine how patients in different kinds of practices—solo or single specialty (SOLO), multispecialty group (MSG), or health maintenance organizations (HMOs)—and with fee-for-service (FFS) or prepaid physician payment arrangements evaluate their medical care. Survey of adult outpatients after office visits, with sample weighted to represent population of patients visiting physicians in each practice type. Offices of 367 internists, family practitioners, endocrinologiste, cardiologists, and nurse practitioners, in HMOs (prepaid only), MSGs (prepaid and FFS), and SOLO practices (prepaid and FFS). Adults (N=17671) at start of the Medical Outcomes Study. Overall rating of the visit (five choices from excellent to poor). A random half of the sample also rated the provider's technical skills, personal manner, and explanations of care as well as time spent during the visit, the appointment wait, the office wait, the convenience of the office location, and telephone access. Fifty-five percent of patients rated their visit overall as excellent, 32% very good, 11% good, and 2% fair or poor. Patients of SOLO practitioners were more likely (64%) to rate their visit excellent than MSG (48%) or HMO (49%) patients (P

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)835-840
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of the American Medical Association
Volume270
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 18 1993

Fingerprint

Outpatients
Fee-for-Service Plans
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Health Maintenance Organizations
Physicians
Office Visits
Sodium Glutamate
Nurse Practitioners
Telephone
Appointments and Schedules
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Patients' Ratings of Outpatient Visits in Different Practice Settings : Results From the Medical Outcomes Study. / Rubin, Haya R.; Gandek, Barbara; Rogers, William H.; Kosinski, Mark; Mchorney, Colleen A.; Ware, John E.

In: Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 270, No. 7, 18.08.1993, p. 835-840.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rubin, Haya R. ; Gandek, Barbara ; Rogers, William H. ; Kosinski, Mark ; Mchorney, Colleen A. ; Ware, John E. / Patients' Ratings of Outpatient Visits in Different Practice Settings : Results From the Medical Outcomes Study. In: Journal of the American Medical Association. 1993 ; Vol. 270, No. 7. pp. 835-840.
@article{59aa820bd1c144b3ac5805944dbf182d,
title = "Patients' Ratings of Outpatient Visits in Different Practice Settings: Results From the Medical Outcomes Study",
abstract = "To determine how patients in different kinds of practices—solo or single specialty (SOLO), multispecialty group (MSG), or health maintenance organizations (HMOs)—and with fee-for-service (FFS) or prepaid physician payment arrangements evaluate their medical care. Survey of adult outpatients after office visits, with sample weighted to represent population of patients visiting physicians in each practice type. Offices of 367 internists, family practitioners, endocrinologiste, cardiologists, and nurse practitioners, in HMOs (prepaid only), MSGs (prepaid and FFS), and SOLO practices (prepaid and FFS). Adults (N=17671) at start of the Medical Outcomes Study. Overall rating of the visit (five choices from excellent to poor). A random half of the sample also rated the provider's technical skills, personal manner, and explanations of care as well as time spent during the visit, the appointment wait, the office wait, the convenience of the office location, and telephone access. Fifty-five percent of patients rated their visit overall as excellent, 32{\%} very good, 11{\%} good, and 2{\%} fair or poor. Patients of SOLO practitioners were more likely (64{\%}) to rate their visit excellent than MSG (48{\%}) or HMO (49{\%}) patients (P",
author = "Rubin, {Haya R.} and Barbara Gandek and Rogers, {William H.} and Mark Kosinski and Mchorney, {Colleen A.} and Ware, {John E.}",
year = "1993",
month = "8",
day = "18",
doi = "10.1001/jama.1993.03510070057036",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "270",
pages = "835--840",
journal = "JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association",
issn = "0098-7484",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Patients' Ratings of Outpatient Visits in Different Practice Settings

T2 - Results From the Medical Outcomes Study

AU - Rubin, Haya R.

AU - Gandek, Barbara

AU - Rogers, William H.

AU - Kosinski, Mark

AU - Mchorney, Colleen A.

AU - Ware, John E.

PY - 1993/8/18

Y1 - 1993/8/18

N2 - To determine how patients in different kinds of practices—solo or single specialty (SOLO), multispecialty group (MSG), or health maintenance organizations (HMOs)—and with fee-for-service (FFS) or prepaid physician payment arrangements evaluate their medical care. Survey of adult outpatients after office visits, with sample weighted to represent population of patients visiting physicians in each practice type. Offices of 367 internists, family practitioners, endocrinologiste, cardiologists, and nurse practitioners, in HMOs (prepaid only), MSGs (prepaid and FFS), and SOLO practices (prepaid and FFS). Adults (N=17671) at start of the Medical Outcomes Study. Overall rating of the visit (five choices from excellent to poor). A random half of the sample also rated the provider's technical skills, personal manner, and explanations of care as well as time spent during the visit, the appointment wait, the office wait, the convenience of the office location, and telephone access. Fifty-five percent of patients rated their visit overall as excellent, 32% very good, 11% good, and 2% fair or poor. Patients of SOLO practitioners were more likely (64%) to rate their visit excellent than MSG (48%) or HMO (49%) patients (P

AB - To determine how patients in different kinds of practices—solo or single specialty (SOLO), multispecialty group (MSG), or health maintenance organizations (HMOs)—and with fee-for-service (FFS) or prepaid physician payment arrangements evaluate their medical care. Survey of adult outpatients after office visits, with sample weighted to represent population of patients visiting physicians in each practice type. Offices of 367 internists, family practitioners, endocrinologiste, cardiologists, and nurse practitioners, in HMOs (prepaid only), MSGs (prepaid and FFS), and SOLO practices (prepaid and FFS). Adults (N=17671) at start of the Medical Outcomes Study. Overall rating of the visit (five choices from excellent to poor). A random half of the sample also rated the provider's technical skills, personal manner, and explanations of care as well as time spent during the visit, the appointment wait, the office wait, the convenience of the office location, and telephone access. Fifty-five percent of patients rated their visit overall as excellent, 32% very good, 11% good, and 2% fair or poor. Patients of SOLO practitioners were more likely (64%) to rate their visit excellent than MSG (48%) or HMO (49%) patients (P

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027279282&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027279282&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jama.1993.03510070057036

DO - 10.1001/jama.1993.03510070057036

M3 - Article

C2 - 8340982

AN - SCOPUS:0027279282

VL - 270

SP - 835

EP - 840

JO - JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association

JF - JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association

SN - 0098-7484

IS - 7

ER -