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
. 2024 Nov 14:11:23743735241297622.
doi: 10.1177/23743735241297622. eCollection 2024.

Does an "EZ" Survey Improve the Data Quality of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) Clinician and Group Survey 3.1?

Ron D Hays  1   2 , Julie A Brown  2 , Charleen Mikail  3 , Denise D Quigley  2
Affiliations

Does an "EZ" Survey Improve the Data Quality of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) Clinician and Group Survey 3.1?

Ron D Hays et al. J Patient Exp. .

Abstract

Completing self-administered patient experience surveys is challenging for many patients. We randomized adult patients receiving care from an urban safety net provider to complete the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) Clinician and Group Survey 3.1 (CG-CAHPS 3.1), or an "EZ" survey created using plain language principles. We compared response rates, item missingness, item-scale correlations, and reliability of patient experience scores based on 264 completed surveys (64% female, 66% Hispanic, 33% high school education or less). The CG-CAHPS 3.1 survey response rate was higher (20% vs 16%), and failure to follow skip instructions was more common for the EZ survey. Internal consistency reliability for multi-item scales was similar, but provider-level reliability was higher for the EZ than for the CG-CAHPS 3.1 survey measures. Cognitive interviews with patients are needed to assess whether the wording of the EZ survey is responsible for the lower response rates and more skip pattern errors. Future studies are also required to provide additional information about the psychometric properties of the CG-CAHPS 3.1 and EZ surveys.

Keywords: outpatient care data; patient experience; quantitative methods; survey data.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Orr N, Zaslavsky AM, Hays RD, et al. Development, methodology, and adaptation of the Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) patient experience survey, 2007–2019. Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol. 2023;23(1):1-20. doi:10.1007/s10742-022-00277-9 - DOI
    1. Darby C, Hays RD, Kletke P. Development and evaluation of the CAHPS hospital survey. Health Serv Res. 2005;40(6 Pt 2):1973-1976. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00490.x - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Quigley DD, Elliott MN, Qureshi N, Predmore Z, Hays RD. How the CAHPS Clinician and Group patient experience survey data have been used in research: a systematic review. J Patient Cent Res Rev. 2024;11(2):88-96. doi:10.17294/2330-0698.2056 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fongwa MN, Cunningham W, Weech-Maldonado R, Gutierrez PR, Hays RD. Comparison of data quality for reports and ratings of ambulatory care by African American and White Medicare managed care enrollees. J Aging Health. 2006;18(5):707-721. doi:10.1177/0898264306293264 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Calvert MJ, Cruz Rivera S, Retzer A, et al. Patient reported outcome assessment must be inclusive and equitable. Nat Med. 2022;28(6):1120-1124. doi:10.1038/s41591-022-01781-8 - DOI - PubMed