NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
The objective of the study was to establish how patient satisfaction with surgical treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD) has been previously measured, determine whether an ideal patient satisfaction instrument exists, and to define the dimensions of care that determine patient satisfaction with the surgical treatment of PD. A systematic search of four online databases, unpublished sources, and citations was undertaken to identify 15 studies reporting patient satisfaction with the surgical treatment of PD. Manuscripts were reviewed and instruments were categorized by content and method axes. One study was found to utilize two distinct patient satisfaction instruments, which brought the total number of satisfaction instruments assessed to 16. Major factors influencing patient satisfaction were identified and served as a structure to define the dimensions of patient satisfaction in the surgical treatment of PD. Studies used predominantly multidimensional (10/16), rather than global (6/16) satisfaction instruments. Generic (12/16) rather than disease-specific (4/16) instruments were utilized more frequently. Every study reported on satisfaction with outcome and four studies reported on satisfaction with outcome and care. Six dimensions of patient status, outcome and care experience affecting patient satisfaction were identified: motor function, patient-specific health characteristics, programming/long-term care, surgical considerations, device/hardware, and functional independence. At present, no patient satisfaction instrument exists that is disease-specific and covers all dimensions of patient satisfaction in surgery for PD. For quality improvement, such a disease-specific, comprehensive patient satisfaction instrument should be designed, and, if demonstrated to be reliable and valid, widely implemented.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.