Search

Background Patients’ subjective experiences during clinical interactions may affect their engagement in healthcare, and better understanding of the issues patients consider most important may help improve service quality and patient-staff relationships. While diagnostic imaging is a growing component of healthcare utilization, few studies have quantitatively and systematically assessed what patients deem most relevant in radiology settings. To elucidate factors driving patient satisfaction in outpatient radiology, we derived quantitative models to identify items most predictive of patients’ overall assessment of radiology encounters. Methods Press-Ganey survey data (N = 69,319) collected over a 9-year period at a single institution were retrospectively analyzed, with each item response dichotomized as “favorable” or “unfavorable.” Multiple logistic regression analyses were performed on 18 binarized Likert items to compute odds ratios (OR) for those question items significantly predicting Overall Rating of Care or Likelihood of Recommending. In a secondary analysis to identify topics more relevant to radiology than other encounter types, items significantly more predictive of concordant ratings in radiology compared to non-radiology visits were also identified. Results Among radiology survey respondents, top predictors of Overall Rating and Likelihood of Recommending were items addressing patient concerns or complaints (OR 6.8 and 4.9, respectively) and sensitivity to patient needs (OR 4.7 and 4.5, respectively). When comparing radiology and non-radiology visits, the top items more predictive for radiology included unfavorable responses to helpfulness of registration desk personnel (OR 1.4–1.6), comfort of waiting areas (OR 1.4), and ease of obtaining an appointment at the desired time (OR 1.4). Conclusions Items related to patient-centered empathic communication were the most predictive of favorable overall ratings among radiology outpatients, while underperformance in logistical issues related to registration, scheduling, and waiting areas may have greater adverse impact on radiology than non-radiology encounters. Findings may offer potential targets for future quality improvement efforts.