Understanding the perspectives of health service staff on the Friends and Family Test
Sandra G. Leggat
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
La Trobe University, Department of Public Health, Bundoora, Vic. 3086, Australia. Email: s.leggat@latrobe.edu.au
Australian Health Review 40(3) 299-305 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH15034
Submitted: 18 February 2015 Accepted: 26 May 2015 Published: 21 September 2015
Abstract
Objectives The present study was designed to determine what staff consider when asked to respond to the Friends and Family Test question.
Methods Over 300 health service staff responded to an online questionnaire exploring whether they would recommend treatment at their organisation to friends and family (Friends and Family Test).
Results Staff identified staff attitudes and behaviours, the busyness of the health service and quality of care as themes that affected their recommendation. A considerable number of staff also identified factors largely outside the control of the health service as influencing their response.
Conclusions Majority of respondents based their perceptions on personal expectations, with smaller numbers citing personal experience and hearsay. Staff would need to see changes both in the quality of care and management practice to amend their recommendation on the Friends and Family Test.
What is known about the topic? The Friends and Family Test is seen as a useful tool to gather the opinions of patients and staff on the patient experience, yet there has been little validation of this question.
What does this paper add? The present study suggests that, as currently worded, the question does not reliably report staff perceptions regarding patient experience. The study illustrates that the relationship with the organisation and perceptions of effective management are linked to staff responses.
What are the implications for practitioners? The Family and Friends Test question may need to be more clearly focused to gather the desired information. Improvement on this indicator is only likely to be seen when management teams are meeting the expectations of staff for good management practice.
References
[1] Reicheld FF. The one number you need. Harv Bus Rev 2003; 81 46–54.[2] Kristensen K, Eskildsen J. Is the Net Promoter Score a reliable performance measure? In IEEE, editor. IEEE International Conference on Quality and Reliability; 14–17 September 2011; Bangkok, Thailand, IEEE.
[3] National NHS Staff Survey Co-ordination Centre. Focused on staff experience. Oxford: National Health Service; 2015 Available at: http://www.nhsstaffsurveys.com/Page/1035/Survey-Documents/Survey- Documents/ [verified 10 February 2015].
[4] Victorian Public Sector Commission. The state of the public sector in Victoria 2012–2013. Melbourne: Victorian Public Sector Commission; 2014.
[5] Jeske DR, Callanan TP, Gui L. Identification of key drivers of Net Promoter Score using a statistical classification model. In Jao C, editor. Efficient decision support systems: practice and challenges from current to future. Shanghai: InTech; 2011. pp. 145–62.
[6] Schulman K, Sargeant A. Measuring donor loyalty: key reasons why Net Promoter Score (NPS) is not the way. Int J Nonprofit Volunt Sect Mark 2013; 18 1–6.
| Measuring donor loyalty: key reasons why Net Promoter Score (NPS) is not the way.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[7] Haas-Wilson D. Arrow and the information market failure in health care: the changing content and sources of health care information. J Health Polit Policy Law 2001; 26 1031–44.
| Arrow and the information market failure in health care: the changing content and sources of health care information.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD38%2FjslCrtA%3D%3D&md5=699e0996ff1f72f8920c9e073d513459CAS | 11765254PubMed |
[8] Leister J, Stausberg J. Why do patients select a hospital? A conjoint analysis in two German hospitals. J Hosp Mark Public Relations 2007; 17 13–31.
| Why do patients select a hospital? A conjoint analysis in two German hospitals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18072702PubMed |
[9] National Health Service (NHS). Change of the headline measure used for the Friends and Family Test (FFT). London: NHS; 2014.
[10] Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC). National safety and quality health service standards. Sydney: ACSQHC; 2011.
[11] Health Workforce Australia. National health workforce innovation and reform strategic framework for action 2011–2015. Canberra: Health Workforce Australia; 2011.
[12] Sanderson M, Allen P, Peckham S, Hughes D, Brown M, Kelly G, Baldie D, Mays N, Linyard A, Duguid A. Divergence of NHS choice policy in the UK: what difference has patient choice policy in England made? J Health Serv Res Policy 2013; 18 202–8.
| Divergence of NHS choice policy in the UK: what difference has patient choice policy in England made?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23904238PubMed |
[13] Pinder RJ, Greaves FE, Aylin P, Jarman B, Bottle A. Staff perceptions of quality of care: an observational study of the NHS staff survey in hospitals in England. BMJ Qual Saf 2013; 22 563–70.
| Staff perceptions of quality of care: an observational study of the NHS staff survey in hospitals in England.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23426646PubMed |
[14] King AJ, Eyre T, Bruce D. Family and friends test is inappropriate for patients with cancer. BMJ 2013; 346 F3553
| Family and friends test is inappropriate for patients with cancer.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23737269PubMed |
[15] Cameron KS, Dutton JE, Quinn RE. An introduction to positive organizational scholarship. In: Cameron KS, Dutton JE, Quinn RE, editors. Positive organizational scholarship. Ann Arbor, MI: Berrett-Koehler Publishers; 2003. pp. 3–13.
[16] Fulop L, Campbell S. The brilliance project: trying to understand great performance in the health service Asia Pacific. J Health Manag 2011; 6 9–14.
[17] Joffe H, Yardley L. 4. Content and thematic analysis. In: Marks DF, Yardley L, editors. Research methods for clinical and health psychology. California: Sage; 2004. pp. 56–68.
[18] Rogers AE, Hwang WT, Scott LD, Aiken LH, Dinges DF. The working hours of hospital staff nurses and patient safety. Health Aff 2004; 23 202–12.
| The working hours of hospital staff nurses and patient safety.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[19] Scott I, Heyworth R, Fairweather P. The use of evidence-based medicine in the practice of consultant physicians. Results of a questionnaire survey. Aust N Z J Med 2000; 30 319–26.
| The use of evidence-based medicine in the practice of consultant physicians. Results of a questionnaire survey.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M%2FisFSrtg%3D%3D&md5=cf2e31c7f4bcbba77e2fdfb7c4beb913CAS | 10914748PubMed |
[20] Victorian Public Sector Commission. The state of the public sector in Victoria 2013–2014. Melbourne: Victorian Public Sector Commission; 2015.
[21] Lis CG, Rodeghier M, Gupta D. The relationship between perceived service quality and patient willingness to recommend at a national oncology hospital network. BMC Health Serv Res 2011; 11 46–53.
| The relationship between perceived service quality and patient willingness to recommend at a national oncology hospital network.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21349200PubMed |
[22] Tung YC, Chang GM. Patient satisfaction with and recommendations of a primary care provider: associations of perceived quality and patient education. Int J Qual Health Care 2009; 21 206–13.
| Patient satisfaction with and recommendations of a primary care provider: associations of perceived quality and patient education.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19258342PubMed |
[23] Liu SS, Franz D, Allen M, Chang EC, Janowiak D, Mayne P, White R. ED services: the impact of caring behaviors on patient loyalty. J Emerg Nurs 2010; 36 404–14.
| ED services: the impact of caring behaviors on patient loyalty.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20837208PubMed |
[24] Dixon-Woods M, Minion JT, McKee L, Willars J, Martin G. The Friends and Family Test: a qualitative study of concerns that influence the willingness of English National Health Service staff to recommend their organisation. J R Soc Med 2014; 107 318–25.
| The Friends and Family Test: a qualitative study of concerns that influence the willingness of English National Health Service staff to recommend their organisation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24781160PubMed |
[25] Campbell SM, Roland MO, Buetow SA. Defining quality of care. Soc Sci Med 2000; 51 1611–25.
| Defining quality of care.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3crhtl2gsg%3D%3D&md5=5f6a0f3b777078e1447080bb87a4d143CAS | 11072882PubMed |
[26] Hellings J, Schrooten W, Klazinga N, Vleugels A. Challenging patient safety culture: survey results. Int J Health Care Qual Assur 2007; 20 620–32.
| Challenging patient safety culture: survey results.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18030963PubMed |
[27] Blendon R, Desroches C, Brodie M, Benson J, Rosen A, Scheider E, Altman DE, Zapert K, Hermann MJ, Steffenson AE. Patient safety: views of practicing physicians and the public on medical errors. N Engl J Med 2002; 347 1933–40.
| Patient safety: views of practicing physicians and the public on medical errors.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 12477944PubMed |
[28] DiFonzo N, Bordia P. How top PR professionals handle hearsay: corporate rumors, their effects, and strategies to manage them. Public Relat Rev 2000; 26 173–90.
| How top PR professionals handle hearsay: corporate rumors, their effects, and strategies to manage them.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[29] Berens G, van Riel C. Corporate associations in the academic literature: Three main streams of thought in the reputation measurement literature. Corp Reputation Rev 2004; 7 161–78.
| Corporate associations in the academic literature: Three main streams of thought in the reputation measurement literature.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[30] Bartram T, Karimi L, Leggat SG, Stanton P. Social identification: linking high performance work systems, psychological empowerment and patient care. Int J Hum Resour Manage 2014; 25 2401–19.
| Social identification: linking high performance work systems, psychological empowerment and patient care.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
