title: Patient feedback in revalidation: an exploratory study using the consultation satisfaction questionnaire.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Revalidation is the UK process for the review of doctors to ensure they are fit to practise. Revalidation will include patient feedback.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To investigate the role of patient feedback on GPs' consultations in revalidation.
  
  
  METHODS
  Cross-sectional survey of patients consulting 171 GPs.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of 6433 patients aged 16 years or over completed the consultation satisfaction questionnaire (CSQ). Generalisability analysis was undertaken, scale scores calculated, and outliers identified using two and three standard deviations from the mean as control limits. Comments made by patients were categorised into positive, neutral, or negative.
  
  
  RESULTS
  After averaging each scale for each doctor, mean scores (standard deviation), out of a possible score of 100, were: general satisfaction 78.1 (7.2); professional care 82.1 (6.1); relationship 71.2 (7.1); perceived time 65.7 (7.6). A D-study (which enables estimation of the reliability from 0-1 of the CSQ scores for different numbers of responders for each doctor), indicated that ratings by 19 patients would achieve a generalisability coefficient of 0.80 for the combined score. Fifteen GPs had one or more scale scores below two standard deviations of the mean. Comments were more often negative for GPs with scores below two standard deviations of the mean.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Most patients of most GPs are satisfied with their experience of consultations, and ways to make patient feedback formative for these doctors is required. For a few GPs, most patients report some dissatisfaction. Patient feedback may identify doctors who need educational support and possibly remediation, but agreed questionnaire score thresholds are required, and agreement is needed on the weight to be attached to patient experience in comparison with other aspects of performance.
authors.affiliation: Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester. rb14@le.ac.uk
authors.forename: Richard
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Baker
authors.forename: Andrew
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Smith
authors.forename: Carolyn
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Tarrant
authors.forename: Robert K
authors.initials: RK
authors.lastname: McKinley
authors.forename: Nicholas
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Taub
mesh_terms: D000068:Accreditation / Q000592:standards*; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002983:Clinical Competence / Q000592:standards*; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D005194:Family Practice / Q000592:standards*; D005246:Feedback; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D010817:Physician-Patient Relations; D006113:United Kingdom