Abstracts

Rationale: Satisfaction surveys delivered after care are often used to capture patient views on value in healthcare. Capitalizing on a social media-based network of disease state communities, we sought to more broadly evaluate the patient viewpoint of value. Methods: This prospective proof-of-concept survey (Survey Monkey) collected anonymous free-text responses solicited via social media to the question "In your own opinion, how do you define ‘value' in healthcare? Please be specific." from members of UCB's online epilepsy and Crohn's disease, and other patient communities. Results were grouped into categories and analyzed by disease state. Results: Response rate was 4.7%. Respondents (N=288) were patients (n=219), caregivers (n=61) or others (n=8), and largely from the epilepsy community (n=145). Responses were grouped into the following categories: care, financials, service, time, and dialog; some differences were noted between the epilepsy and Crohn's disease communities (Figure). Care responses focused on the broad context of a patient's healthcare and included evaluation of available facilities, medicines, well trained physicians, access, correct diagnosis and results, patient quality of life and emotional well-being, and relationship (patients wanted physician and staff respect and compassion, a sense of teamwork and a personal relationship). Responses about financials demonstrated a concern for the ability to pay for services received, referring to affordable health insurance premiums, low co-pays, or affordable medicines. For the epilepsy respondents, physician attention was valued more than costs of physician visits, and access to specialists was also a category with high financial value. Service responses related to the physician advocacy for the patient, patient access to primary and specialty physicians, and receiving prompt, respectful service from the physician and office staff. Time responses most frequently related to the quantity and quality of time spent with physicians, and physicians taking time to give the patient full attention. Less mentioned were wait times in-office or time spent getting appointments/resolving issues. Dialog responses reflected desire for two-way dialog between physicians and patients and concern that limited visit time prevented answering all questions. Conclusions: This data is significant for better understanding patient perceptions of healthcare value - particularly the substantial humanistic component indicated by emphasis on non-financial aspects of care. Given the small number of respondents and brief duration of access to the survey, conclusions are limited by whether this was a representative sample. While differences may exist by patient population, this survey identified key aspects of healthcare value independent of services being provided (eg, patient satisfaction survey) and provides the foundation for a second larger survey consisting of closed-ended questions to generate structured data for analysis, ranking and weighting of respondents' priorities. Funded by UCB Inc. Disclosure information: GC, BLP, and JF are employees of UCB Inc