patient satisfaction, interprofessional collaboration, hospital care, systematic review, quality metrics
Purpose: Limited research examining the relationship between team-based models of care and patient satisfaction in the hospital setting is available. The purpose of this literature review was to explore this relationship as well as the relationships between team composition, team-based interventions, patient satisfaction, and other outcomes of care when measured as part of the study.
Methods: A systematic appraisal of research studies published through February 2017 was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Embase, Ovid, gray literature and Google Scholar. Inclusion criteria were 1) experimental (randomized control trials), quasi-experimental, or non-experimental (cross-sectional) study design; 2) team-based care interventions; 3) hospital setting; 4) patient satisfaction measured as an outcome; and 5) published in English.
Results: The literature search yielded 15,247 citations. In total, 142 articles were retrieved for full-text screening; 21 studies met inclusion criteria. Overall, 57% of the studies identified a statistically significant improvement in patient satisfaction associated with team-based care. Team-based care interventions ranged from single team activities such as multidisciplinary rounds to comprehensive team-based models of care. Patient satisfaction scores were greater with teams that had more than two professions and more comprehensive team-based models. About one-quarter of studies that measured patient satisfaction and at least one additional outcome demonstrated improvement in both.
Conclusions: Team-based care may positively affect patient satisfaction. Team composition and type of team intervention appears to influence the strength of the relationship. Improvements in satisfaction are not consistently accompanied by improvements in other outcomes.
Will KK, Johnson ML, Lamb G. Team-based care and patient satisfaction in the hospital setting: a systematic review. J Patient Cent Res Rev. 2019;6:158-71. doi: 10.17294/2330-0698.1695