The engaged patient: patient activation can predict satisfaction with surgical treatment of lumbar and cervical spine disorders

Restricted access

OBJECTIVE

Care satisfaction is an important metric to health systems and payers. Patient activation is a hierarchical construct following 4 stages: 1) having a belief that taking an active role in their care is important, 2) having knowledge and skills to manage their condition, 3) having the confidence to make necessary behavioral changes, and 4) having an ability to maintain those changes in times of stress. The authors hypothesized that patients with a high level of activation, measured using the Patient Activation Measure (PAM), will be more engaged in their care and, therefore, will be more likely to be satisfied with the results of their surgical treatment.

METHODS

Using a prospectively collected registry at a multiprovider university practice, the authors examined patients who underwent elective surgery (n = 257) for cervical or lumbar spinal disorders. Patients were assessed before and after surgery (6 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months) using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) health domains and the PAM. Satisfaction was assessed using the Patient Satisfaction Index. Using repeated-measures logistic regression, the authors compared the likelihood of being satisfied across stages of patient activation after adjusting for baseline characteristics (i.e., age, sex, race, education, income, and marital status).

RESULTS

While a majority of patients endorsed the highest level of activation (56%), 51 (20%) endorsed the lower two stages (neither believing that taking an active role was important nor having the knowledge and skills to manage their condition). Preoperative patient activation was weakly correlated (r ≤ 0.2) with PROMIS health domains. The most activated patients were 3 times more likely to be satisfied with their treatment at 1 year (OR 3.23, 95% CI 1.8–5.8). Similarly, patients in the second-highest stage of activation also demonstrated significantly greater odds of being satisfied (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.5–5.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who are more engaged in their healthcare prior to elective spine surgery are significantly more likely to be satisfied with their postoperative outcome. Clinicians may want to implement previously proven techniques to increase patient activation in order to improve patient satisfaction following elective spine surgery.

ABBREVIATIONS PAM = Patient Activation Measure; PROMIS = Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System.
Article Information

Contributor Notes

Correspondence Richard L. Skolasky: The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. rskolas1@jhmi.edu.INCLUDE WHEN CITING Published online February 7, 2020; DOI: 10.3171/2019.11.SPINE191159.Disclosures Dr. Riley reports being on the board of directors for LifeNet Health.
Headings
References
  • 1

    Al-Abri RAl-Balushi A: Patient satisfaction survey as a tool towards quality improvement. Oman Med J 29:372014

  • 2

    Anderson RBarbara AFeldman S: What patients want: a content analysis of key qualities that influence patient satisfaction. J Med Pract Manage 22:2552612007

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Camacho FAnderson RSafrit AJones ASHoffmann P: The relationship between patient’s perceived waiting time and office-based practice satisfaction. N C Med J 67:4094132006

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Cella DGershon RLai JSChoi S: The future of outcomes measurement: item banking, tailored short-forms, and computerized adaptive assessment. Qual Life Res 16 (Suppl 1):1331412007

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Cella DRiley WStone ARothrock NReeve BYount S: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005–2008. J Clin Epidemiol 63:117911942010

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Daltroy LHCats-Baril WLKatz JNFossel AHLiang MH: The North American Spine Society Lumbar Spine Outcome Assessment Instrument: reliability and validity tests. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 21:7417491996

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Druss BGZhao Lvon Esenwein SABona JRFricks LJenkins-Tucker S: The Health and Recovery Peer (HARP) Program: a peer-led intervention to improve medical self-management for persons with serious mental illness. Schizophr Res 118:2642702010

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Ellis DJMallozzi SSMathews JEMoss ILOuellet JAJarzem P: The relationship between preoperative expectations and the short-term postoperative satisfaction and functional outcome in lumbar spine surgery: a systematic review. Global Spine J 5:4364522015

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Gan TJHabib ASMiller TEWhite WApfelbaum JL: Incidence, patient satisfaction, and perceptions of post-surgical pain: results from a US national survey. Curr Med Res Opin 30:1491602014

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Harvey LFowles JBXi MTerry P: When activation changes, what else changes? the relationship between change in patient activation measure (PAM) and employees’ health status and health behaviors. Patient Educ Couns 88:3383432012

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Hibbard JHGreene J: What the evidence shows about patient activation: better health outcomes and care experiences; fewer data on costs. Health Aff (Millwood) 32:2072142013

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Hibbard JHStockard JMahoney ERTusler M: Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Serv Res 39:100510262004

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Houlihan BVBrody MEverhart-Skeels SPernigotti DBurnett SZazula J: Randomized trial of a peer-led, telephone-based empowerment intervention for persons with chronic spinal cord injury improves health self-management. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 98:10671076.e12017

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    Jensen JDAllen LBlasko RNagy P: Using quality improvement methods to improve patient experience. J Am Coll Radiol 13 (12 Pt B):155015542016

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Lyu HWick ECHousman MFreischlag JAMakary MA: Patient satisfaction as a possible indicator of quality surgical care. JAMA Surg 148:3623672013

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Philp SCarter JPather SBarnett CD’Abrew NWhite K: Patients’ satisfaction with fast-track surgery in gynaecological oncology. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 24:5675732015

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Pilkonis PAChoi SWReise SPStover AMRiley WTCella D: Item banks for measuring emotional distress from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®): depression, anxiety, and anger. Assessment 18:2632832011

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Purvis TEAndreou ENeuman BJRiley LH IIISkolasky RL: Concurrent validity and responsiveness of PROMIS health domains among patients presenting for anterior cervical spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42:E1357E13652017

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Purvis TENeuman BJRiley LH IIISkolasky RL: Discriminant ability, concurrent validity, and responsiveness of PROMIS health domains among patients with lumbar degenerative disease undergoing decompression with or without arthrodesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 43:151215202018

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Remmers CHibbard JMosen DMWagenfield MHoye REJones C: Is patient activation associated with future health outcomes and healthcare utilization among patients with diabetes? J Ambul Care Manage 32:3203272009

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    Schmocker RKCherney Stafford LMSiy ABLeverson GEWinslow ER: Understanding the determinants of patient satisfaction with surgical care using the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems surgical care survey (S-CAHPS). Surgery 158:172417332015

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22

    Skolasky RLMackenzie EJRiley LH IIIWegener ST: Psychometric properties of the Patient Activation Measure among individuals presenting for elective lumbar spine surgery. Qual Life Res 18:135713662009

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23

    Skolasky RLMackenzie EJWegener STRiley LH III: Patient activation and adherence to physical therapy in persons undergoing spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33:E784E7912008

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24

    Skolasky RLMackenzie EJWegener STRiley LH III: Patient activation and functional recovery in persons undergoing spine surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:166516712011

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25

    Skolasky RLMaggard AMLi DRiley LH IIIWegener ST: Health behavior change counseling in surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Part I: improvement in rehabilitation engagement and functional outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 96:120012072015

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26

    Skolasky RLMaggard AMLi DRiley LH IIIWegener ST: Health behavior change counseling in surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Part II: patient activation mediates the effects of health behavior change counseling on rehabilitation engagement. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 96:120812142015

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27

    Skolasky RLMaggard AMWegener STRiley LH III: Telephone-based intervention to improve rehabilitation engagement after spinal stenosis surgery: a prospective lagged controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 100:21302018

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28

    Terry PEFowles JBXi MHarvey L: The ACTIVATE study: results from a group-randomized controlled trial comparing a traditional worksite health promotion program with an activated consumer program. Am J Health Promot 26:e64e732011

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29

    Tevis SEKennedy GDKent KC: Is there a relationship between patient satisfaction and favorable surgical outcomes? Adv Surg 49:2212332015

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30

    Thompson AGSuñol R: Expectations as determinants of patient satisfaction: concepts, theory and evidence. Int J Qual Health Care 7:1271411995

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31

    Toyone TTanaka TKato DKaneyama ROtsuka M: Patients’ expectations and satisfaction in lumbar spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:268926942005

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32

    Tsai TCOrav EJJha AK: Patient satisfaction and quality of surgical care in US hospitals. Ann Surg 261:282015

  • 33

    Tzeng ATzeng THVasdev SGrindy ASaleh JKSaleh KJ: The role of patient activation in achieving better outcomes and cost-effectiveness in patient care. JBJS Rev 3:32015

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34

    Waljee JMcGlinn EPSears EDChung KC: Patient expectations and patient-reported outcomes in surgery: a systematic review. Surgery 155:7998082014

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
TrendMD
Metrics

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 350 350 350
Full Text Views 34 34 34
PDF Downloads 40 40 40
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0
PubMed
Google Scholar