ANCO's 2006 Patient Satisfaction Survey attracted twenty-two (22) physicians in five ANCO member practices, with mixed results for those who saw their customer service efforts gaining momentum. In summary, while physicians’ scores were slightly higher, nearly all other ratings were lower than in 2004.

A two-year trend analysis looks like this:

Item/Mean	2006	2004
Appointment	4.42	4.77
Staff performance	4.69	4.72
Communication	4.46	4.49
Physician performance	4.68	4.66

At the same time, overall satisfaction declined from 4.76 to 4.65--a statistically significant difference, considering that mean scores for all specialist practices are clustered between 3.07 and 4.96 (which effectively compresses the range of scores into the top two points of the five-point scale).

Further, when benchmarking against the national oncology database, ANCO is chasing a moving target.  The database is slowly ticking upward, due most likely to the push for "pay for performance" incentives.  While ANCO's physician mean score rose only two hundredths of a point (from 4.66 in 2004 to 4.68 in 2006), its percentile ranking dropped from the 84th to the 72nd percentile. Viewed in terms of overall patient satisfaction, ANCO's ranking fell from the 88th percentile (2004) to the 55th percentile--again, due to the upward trending of the national database.

Taking a closer look at overall satisfaction, the summary responses are skewed toward the positive end of the scale:

Item/Response	Excellent	Very Good	Good	Fair	Poor
Overall satisfaction with practice	71.3	23.0	4.8	0.8	0.1

Marketers interpret the spread of responses this way:  Excellent and Very good percentages represent loyal patients who are good sources of word-of-mouth referrals.  Fair and Poor ratings mean just the opposite.  Good responses, as the mid-point of the scale, are best seen as a neither-nor rating, which suggests that overall, the "vulnerability index" of ANCO members is 5.7% (Good + Fair + Poor). Looked at another way, more than one of every 20 patients is either neutral or negative about their ANCO practice.  For specialists who depend on referral volume, that is not good.

Advice from Sullivan/Luallin (the consultants who conduct ANCO's patient survey, and work with the highest-scoring practices on pay-for-performance incentives) includes sharing the survey results with the entire team, focusing on strengths as well as weaknesses, and involving everyone in a brainstorming of ways to raise these scores. 

Future Survey Plans