Measuring Team Satisfaction in Primary Care

Measuring Team Satisfaction in Primary Care

Research by: Holly Kennedy-­‐Symonds MHSc, Wilma Watson MCE, Chris Nedelmann MBA

Context

In recent years, studies have modeled the relationship between measures of job satisfaction for primary care teams and objective measures of quality based on process indicators and clinical outcomes. Multilevel analyses indicated that aggregate job satisfaction ratings are associated with higher values on both quality measures.

Team‐level job satisfaction ratings are a potentially important marker for the effectiveness of primary care teams in managing patient care¹. Measurement of team satisfaction is therefore an important quality indicator.

Objective

To measure job satisfaction across the Copeman Healthcare interdisciplinary team in British Columbia.

Participants and Methods

An on‐line survey was sent to interdisciplinary team members measuring engagement; the emotional and intellectual commitment to the organization. The survey was designed to elicit responses on what staff & physicians say about the organization, do they intend to stay and do they strive to achieve above and beyond what is expected in their role.

Results

70.5% was the overall respondent rate. Of the engagement behaviours (Table 1): 91% would recommend this organization to a friend, 90% would tell others great things about working here; 79% reported it would take a lot to get them to leave; 88% felt inspired to do their best work everyday. Drivers of engagement identified were leadership, teamwork and environment.

Conclusions

  • Copeman Healthcare team satisfaction surveys show consistently high scores between years.
  • Improvement opportunities are improving staff recognition and work flow processes.
  • Initiatives are underway to engage the team in meaningful recognition programs.
  • Improvement ideas on work flow process are harvested and implemented monthly.

1. The Relationship Between Job Satisfaction of Primary Care Team Members and Quality of Care: A Comment on Mohr et al American Journal of Medical Quality January 1, 2011 26: 8‐9

Click here to view the complete poster as presented at APCC 2013, including supporting figures