Influence on patients satisfaction with rehabilitation assistance of questionnaires focusing on positive impressions of the procedures received

This study involved 229 patients receiving rehabilitation care for a wide range of diseases of the spine and joints and the consequences of injuries. The assessment of patients 'satisfaction with medical care was carried out depending on whether questionnaires were used to increase patients' attention to positive sensations associated with massage and balneotherapy procedures (the main group) or there were no such questionnaires (the control group)

Patients were assigned to the control group (46 people) and the main group (183 people). In both groups, patients received massage and balneotherapy sessions. The average age in both groups was 62.4 ± 8.8 years. There were 73 men and 156 women in both groups. The distribution into groups was randomized using a random number generator.

All patients completed the ppe-15 questionnaire twice (before and after massage and balneotherapy), which allows assessing the level of patient satisfaction in several domains. In the main group, the difference was that patients after massage and balneotherapy were asked to fill out a specially developed questionnaire, which recorded the patient's attention to the severity of positive feelings. The questionnaires were proposed to be filled in against the background of the sensations experienced by the patients (with a high probability of positive) associated with the massage or balneotherapy procedure.

It is determined that the use of potentiating questionnaires against the background of positive impressions associated with massage and balneotherapy contributes to the growth of satisfaction with medical care, in terms of psychological aspects of functioning. According to the Kolmogorov-Smirnov criterion, the differences were significant at p < 0.0001 (Maximum difference = 0.38). However, the use of potentiating questionnaires does not lead to a statistically significant increase in patient satisfaction in terms of their awareness, does not affect assessments related to respect for the patient, does not significantly affect the physical condition and assessments related to the involvement of loved ones.

For a more direct assessment of the subjectively perceived relationship between the effect of massage and balneotherapy using questionnaires on the level of satisfaction with medical care in the institution, a randomized randomized group of 90 people (45 from the main and control groups) was formed. participants in this group answered a question about the impact of massage and balneotherapy on satisfaction with medical care in this institution. according to the statistical analysis, using a four-field table, statistically significant differences were determined between those who filled out the potentiating questionnaires (were more often satisfied with the institution) and those who did not fill out (were less often satisfied with the institution). The Chi-square test = 11.072 at p < 0.001, and the average strength of the relationship between the use of potentiating questionnaires and satisfaction with medical care in the institution was determined by the criteria of Kramer's V, Chuprov's K, φ (0.35) and Pearson's criterion (0.33).

Thus, the use of potentiating questionnaires in association with procedures that cause pleasant sensations (massage and balneotherapy) contributes to the growth of patients satisfaction with the medical care provided to them in the institution.

1. Ageeva N.A. Defekty okazaniya medicinskoj pomoshhi: problemy i puti resheniya [Defects in medical care: problems and solutions]. Universum: medicina i farmakologiya [Universum: medicine and pharmacology]. 2014. N 6 (7). Рр. 2. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/defekty-okazaniya-meditsinskoy-pomoschi-problemyi-puti-resheniya (In Russ.)

2. Orlov A.E. Sovremennye problemy kachestva medicinskoj pomoshhi (obzor literatury) [ Current problems of quality of care (literature review)]. Vestnik novyh medicinskih tehnologij [Bulletin of new medical technologies]. 2015. N 1. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sovremennye-problemy-kachestva-meditsinskoypomoschi-obzor-literatury (In Russ.)

3. Cherkasov M.A., Gerashhenko N.I., Parfeev D.G. [et al.] Russkoyazychnaya versiya oprosnika picker patient experience questionnaire: yazykovaya i kulturnaya adaptaciya [Russian version of the questionnaire picker patient experience questionnaire: language and cultural adaptation]. Mezhdunarodnyj zhurnal prikladnyh i fundamentalnyh issledovanij [International Journal of Applied and Basic Research]. 2018. N 3. Рр. 91–95. (In Russ.)

4. Cherkasov M.A., Chernyj A.Zh., Shubnyakov I.I. [et al.] Kompleksnaya ocenka kachestva okazaniya medicinskoj pomoshhi s tochki zreniya pacienta [Comprehensive assessment of the quality of care from the patient's point of view]. Novosti hirurgii [Surgery news]. 2019. T. 27, N 1. Рр. 49–58. (In Russ.)

5. Yukish V.F. Aktualnye problemy medicinskogo obsluzhivaniya naseleniya Rossii i perspektivy reformirovaniya dannoj sfery ekonomiki [Topical problems of medical care of the population of Russia and prospects of reforming this sphere of economy]. Aktualnye problemy gumanitarnyh i estestvennyh nauk [Topical problems of humanities and natural sciences]. 2014. N 5–1. Рр. 290–297. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/aktualnye-problemy-meditsinskogo-obsluzhivaniya-naseleniyarossii-i-perspektivy-reformirovaniya-dannoy-sfery-ekonomiki (In Russ.)

6. Bąbel P., Bajcar E.A., Adamczyk W. [et al.] Classical conditioning without verbal suggestions elicits placebo analgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia. PLoS One. 2017. Vol. 12, N 7. e0181856. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181856. PMID: 28750001; PMCID: PMC5531508.

7. Bartels D.J.P., van Laarhoven A.I.M., Stroo M. [et al.] Minimizing nocebo effects by conditioning with verbal suggestion: A randomized clinical trial in healthy humans. PLoS One. 2017. Vol. 14, N 12 (9). e0182959. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0182959. PMID: 28910291; PMCID: PMC5598922.

8. Benedetti F., Piedimonte A. The neurobiological underpinnings of placebo and nocebo effects. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2019. N 49 (3S). S18–S21. doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2019.09.015. PMID: 31779844.

9. Blasini M., Peiris N., Wright T., Colloca L. The Role of Patient-Practitioner Relationships in Placebo and Nocebo Phenomena. Int Rev Neurobiol. 2018. N 139. Рр. 211–231. doi: 10.1016/bs.irn.2018.07.033. PMID: 30146048; PMCID: PMC6176716.

10. Bräscher A.K., Witthöft M., Becker S. The Underestimated Significance of Conditioning in Placebo Hypoalgesia and Nocebo Hyperalgesia. Pain Res Manag. 2018. N 28: 6841985. doi: 10.1155/2018/6841985. PMID: 29670678; PMCID: PMC5833150.

11. Chida Y., Steptoe A. Positive psychological well-being and mortality: a quantitative review of prospective observational studies. Psychosom Med. 2008. Vol. 70, N 7. Рр. 741-756. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0b013e31818105ba. PMID: 18725425.

12. Dobrila-Dintinjana R., Nacinović-Duletić A. Placebo in the treatment of pain. Coll Antropol. 2011. N 35, Suppl 2. Рр. 319–323. PMID: 22220463.

13. DuBois C.M., Lopez O.V., Beale E.E. [et al.] Relationships between positive psychological constructs and health outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease: A systematic review. Int. J. Cardiol. 2015. Vol. 15, N 195. Рр. 265–280. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.05.121. PMID: 26048390; PMCID: PMC4487518.

14. Flanigan D.C., Everhart J.S., Glassman A.H. Psychological Factors Affecting Rehabilitation and Outcomes Following Elective Orthopaedic Surgery. J. Am. Acad. Orthop. Surg. 2015. Vol. 23, N 9. Рр. 563–570. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-14-00225. PMID: 26195567.

15. Jenkinson C., Coulter A., Reeves R. [et al.] Properties of the Picker Patient Experience questionnaire in a randomized controlled trial of long versus short form survey instruments. J. Public. Health Med. 2003. Vol. 25, N 3. Рр. 197–201. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdg049. PMID: 14575193.

16. Kersten P., White P.J., Tennant A. Is the pain visual analogue scale linear and responsive to change? An exploration using Rasch analysis. PLoS One. 2014. Vol. 12, N 9 (6). e99485. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099485. PMID: 24921952; PMCID: PMC40557.

17. Perneger T.V., Kossovsky M.P., Cathieni F. [et al.] A randomized trial of four patient satisfaction questionnaires. Med Care. 2003. Vol. 41, N 12. Рр. 1343– 1352. doi: 10.1097/01.MLR.0000100580.94559.AD. PMID: 14668667.

18. Pouillon L., Socha M., Demore B. [et al.] The nocebo effect: a clinical challenge in the era of biosimilars. Expert Rev. Clin. Immunol. 2018. Vol. 14, N 9. Рр. 739–749. doi: 10.1080/1744666X.2018.1512406. PMID: 30118338.

19. Reicherts P., Gerdes A.B., Pauli P., Wieser M.J. Psychological Placebo and Nocebo Effects on Pain Rely on Expectation and Previous Experience. J. Pain. 2016. Vol. 17, N 3. Рр. 203–214. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2015.10.010. PMID: 26523863.

20. Rossettini G., Camerone E.M., Carlino E. [et al.] Context matters: the psychoneurobiological determinants of placebo, nocebo and context-related effects in physiotherapy. Arch. Physiother. 2020. Vol. 11, N 10. Р. 11. doi: 10.1186/s40945-020-00082-y. PMID: 32537245; PMCID: PMC7288522.

21. Schmitz J., Müller M., Stork J. [et al.] Positive Treatment Expectancies Reduce Clinical Pain and Perceived Limitations in Movement Ability Despite Increased Experimental Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Sham Opioid Infusion in Patients with Chronic Back Pain. Psychother Psychosom. 2019. Vol. 88, N 4. Рр. 203– 214. doi: 10.1159/000501385. PMID: 31302644.