Experiences with hearing health care services (Manchaiah et al., 2021)

Objective: The aim of this study was to examine experiences of hearing health care services as described in online consumer reviews.Design: This study used a cross-sectional design. Online consumer reviews about hearing health care services generated from Google.com to an open-ended question “Share details of your own experience at this place” and perceived overall experience (indicated on a 5-point rating scale: “very good” to “very poor”) were extracted from 40 different cities across the United States. The open text contributed a text corpus of 9,622 unique consumer reviews. These responses were analyzed with the cluster analysis approach using an open-source automated text analysis software program, IRaMuTeQ, to identify key themes. Association between clusters and consumer experience ratings as well as consumer metadata (percentage of older adults in the city, region) were examined using the chi-square analysis.Results: The majority of consumers appeared satisfied with their hearing health care services, with nearly 95% of consumers reporting “very good” and “good” on the global experience scale. The analysis of text responses resulted in seven clusters within two domains. Domain 1 (Clinical Processes) included the three clusters: administration processes, perceived benefits, and device acquisition. Domain 2 (Staff and Service Interactions) included the four clusters: clinician communications, staff professionalism, customer service, and provider satisfaction. Content relating to administration processes was associated with overall rating regarding the hearing health care service experience. Consumer’s reviews relating to administration processes mostly described negative experiences, and these participants were more inclined to provide poorer overall experience ratings. In addition, city characteristics (i.e., percentage of older adults, region) had bearing toward what elements of hearing health care services are highlighted more in the consumer reviews.Conclusions: Consumers comment on a variety of elements when describing their experiences with hearing health care services. Experiences reported in most clusters were generally positive, although some concerns in the “clinical process” are associated with lower satisfaction. Employing patient-centered strategies and ensuring patients have good experiences in the areas of concern may help improve both patient experience and their satisfaction.Supplemental Material S1. List of U.S. cities from which the consumer reviews on hearing health care services were extracted (Google.com). Manchaiah, V., Bennett, R. J., Ratinaud, P., & Swanepoel, D. W. (2021). Experiences with hearing health care services: What can we learn from online consumer reviews? American Journal of Audiology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1044/2021_AJA-21-00041

研究目的：本研究的目的是审视在线消费者评价中关于听觉健康管理服务的体验。研究设计：本研究采用横断面设计，从Google.com生成的关于听觉健康管理服务的在线消费者评价中，提取了针对开放性问题‘分享您在此处的个人体验细节’以及整体体验感知（以五点评分量表表示，从‘非常好’到‘非常差’）的数据。这些数据来源于美国40个不同城市。开放文本贡献了一个包含9,622篇独特消费者评价的文本语料库。这些回应通过开源自动文本分析软件程序IRaMuTeQ的聚类分析方法进行解析，以识别关键主题。通过卡方分析，考察了聚类与消费者体验评分以及消费者元数据（城市中老年人口比例，地区）之间的关联。研究结果：大多数消费者对他们的听觉健康管理服务表示满意，近95%的消费者在全球体验量表上报告为‘非常好’和‘好’。文本回应的分析导致在两个领域内形成了七个聚类。领域一（临床流程）包括三个聚类：行政管理流程、感知益处和设备获取。领域二（工作人员与服务互动）包括四个聚类：临床医生沟通、员工专业性、客户服务和提供者满意度。与行政管理流程相关的内容与听觉健康管理服务体验的整体评价相关联。与行政管理流程相关的消费者评价主要描述了负面体验，这些参与者更倾向于提供较差的整体体验评价。此外，城市特征（即老年人口比例，地区）对消费者评价中哪些听觉健康管理服务要素被强调更多产生影响。研究结论：消费者在描述其与听觉健康管理服务的体验时，会评论各种要素。大多数聚类报告的体验普遍为正面，尽管某些“临床流程”中的担忧与较低的满意度相关。采用以患者为中心的策略，并确保患者在关注领域的良好体验，可能有助于改善患者体验及其满意度。补充材料S1：提取消费者评价的U.S.城市列表（Google.com）。Manchaiah, V., Bennett, R. J., Ratinaud, P., & Swanepoel, D. W. (2021). 听觉健康管理服务的体验：我们能从在线消费者评价中学到什么？美国听觉学杂志。在线预发表。https://doi.org/10.1044/2021_AJA-21-00041