Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2011 Sep 27;13(3):e68.
doi: 10.2196/jmir.1241.

A comparison of a postal survey and mixed-mode survey using a questionnaire on patients' experiences with breast care

Marloes Zuidgeest  1 , Michelle Hendriks, Laura Koopman, Peter Spreeuwenberg, Jany Rademakers
Affiliations
Comparative Study

A comparison of a postal survey and mixed-mode survey using a questionnaire on patients' experiences with breast care

Marloes Zuidgeest et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: The Internet is increasingly considered to be an efficient medium for assessing the quality of health care seen from the patients' perspective. Potential benefits of Internet surveys such as time efficiency, reduced effort, and lower costs should be balanced against potential weaknesses such as low response rates and accessibility for only a subset of potential participants. Combining an Internet questionnaire with a traditional paper follow-up questionnaire (mixed-mode survey) can possibly compensate for these weaknesses and provide an alternative to a postal survey.

Objective: To examine whether there are differences between a mixed-mode survey and a postal survey in terms of respondent characteristics, response rate and time, quality of data, costs, and global ratings of health care or health care providers (general practitioner, hospital care in the diagnostic phase, surgeon, nurses, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and hospital care in general).

Methods: Differences between the two surveys were examined in a sample of breast care patients using the Consumer Quality Index Breast Care questionnaire. We selected 800 breast care patients from the reimbursement files of Dutch health insurance companies. We asked 400 patients to fill out the questionnaire online followed by a paper reminder (mixed-mode survey) and 400 patients, matched by age and gender, received the questionnaire by mail only (postal survey). Both groups received three reminders.

Results: The respondents to the two surveys did not differ in age, gender, level of education, or self-reported physical and psychological health (all Ps > .05). In the postal survey, the questionnaires were returned 20 days earlier than in the mixed-mode survey (median 12 and 32 days, respectively; P < .001), whereas the response rate did not differ significantly (256/400, 64.0% versus 242/400, 60.5%, respectively; P = .30). The costs were lower for the mixed-mode survey (€2 per questionnaire). Moreover, there were fewer missing items (3.4% versus 4.4%, P = .002) and fewer invalid answers (3.2% versus 6.2%, P < .001) in the mixed-mode survey than in the postal survey. The answers of the two respondent groups on the global ratings did not differ. Within the mixed-mode survey, 52.9% (128/242) of the respondents filled out the questionnaire online. Respondents who filled out the questionnaire online were significantly younger (P < .001), were more often highly educated (P = .002), and reported better psychological health (P = .02) than respondents who filled out the paper questionnaire. Respondents to the paper questionnaire rated the nurses significantly more positively than respondents to the online questionnaire (score 9.2 versus 8.4, respectively; χ²₁ = 5.6).

Conclusions: Mixed-mode surveys are an alternative method to postal surveys that yield comparable response rates and groups of respondents, at lower costs. Moreover, quality of health care was not rated differently by respondents to the mixed-mode or postal survey. Researchers should consider using mixed-mode surveys instead of postal surveys, especially when investigating younger or more highly educated populations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None declared

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Mail-shots sent to the patients.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Percentage of received questionnaires by days after first mail-shot for the postal and mixed-mode surveys.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Percentage of received questionnaires by days after first mail-shot for the Internet and paper questionnaires within the mixed-mode survey.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Schut FT, Van de Ven WP. Rationing and competition in the Dutch health-care system. Health Econ. 2005 Sep;14(Suppl 1):S59–74. doi: 10.1002/hec.1036. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Delnoij DM, ten Asbroek G, Arah OA, de Koning JS, Stam P, Poll A, Vriens B, Schmidt P, Klazinga NS. Made in the USA: the import of American Consumer Assessment of Health Plan Surveys (CAHPS) into the Dutch social insurance system. Eur J Public Health. 2006 Dec;16(6):652–9. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckl023. http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=16524940ckl023 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Zuidgeest M, Sixma H, Rademakers J. Measuring patients' experiences with rheumatic care: the consumer quality index rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatol Int. 2009 Apr 16;30(2):159–67. doi: 10.1007/s00296-009-0926-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Damman OC, Hendriks M, Sixma HJ. Towards more patient centred healthcare: a new Consumer Quality Index instrument to assess patients' experiences with breast care. Eur J Cancer. 2009 Jun;45(9):1569–77. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.12.011.S0959-8049(08)01025-3 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brandt H, Zuidgeest M, Sixma H. Development of CQ-index Care for the Handicapped: measuring the quality of care from a client perspective (in Dutch) Utrecht: NIVEL; 2007. [2010-12-06]. http://www.nivel.nl/pdf/Pilot-ontwikkeling-CQ-index-Gehandicaptenzorg-20....

Publication types