ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 2046

Development and Validation of a Rheumatologist Satisfaction with Practice Scale –“ the Rheumatologist Satisfaction Scale” (RSS)

Khushboo Sheth1, Antonia Valenzuela2, Stanford Shoor3, Philip L. Ritter3 and Kate Lorig4, 1Immunology & Rheumatology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 2Immunology and Rheumatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, 3Immunology & Rheumatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, 4Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA

Meeting: 2017 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Date of first publication: September 18, 2017

Keywords: quality improvement and quality measures, Rheumatology

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Date: Tuesday, November 7, 2017

Title: Measures and Measurement of Healthcare Quality Poster II

Session Type: ACR Poster Session C

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: Practice improvement research routinely measures patient satisfaction and disease-specific outcomes but seldom considers the satisfaction of physicians who deliver the care. Studies suggest that physician dissatisfaction may pose a barrier to implementing quality improvement efforts. There is a paucity of succinct measures of physician satisfaction. As part of a Performance Improvement Project, in an academic rheumatology practice and an affiliated practice, we developed and piloted a simple questionnaire.

Methods: Thirty five rheumatologists in the academic or private setting were sent opened-ended questions to determine the factors that made them satisfied or dissatisfied with respect to their rheumatology practice. From the responses we formed a 14 questions 0 to 10 scale centering on satisfaction and dissatisfaction. We then administered the questionnaires to a small pilot of 30 rheumatologists in academic and/or private setting.

Results: Our sample included 30 rheumatologists, from whom 60% were faculty members, 27 % were fellows, 53% (N=16) were males and the majority (77%) were salaried. Racial distribution was 57% white, and 40% Asian, with 7% Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. The most common practice setting was academic medicine (80%, N=24), followed by multi-specialty group (10%, N=3), private practice (7%, N=2), and rheumatology group (3%, N=1). Forty percent (N=12) and 37% (N=11) had been in practice <5 and >30 years, respectively. Coefficient Alpha for each factor was 0.54 (raw) 0.66 (standardized) for satisfaction and 0.60 (raw) and 0.60 (standardized) for dissatisfaction. Based on the results of this survey, mean satisfaction factor in rheumatologists was high (8.6±0.99). 91.3% of rheumatologists (N=21) had mean satisfaction factor >8 (range 5.5-9.9). The ability to make a difference in patient’s life and having the opportunity to work with great colleagues were the strongest contributors to physicians’ satisfaction (mean 9.2±1.1 and 9.4±0.8, respectively). Time spent on documentation and getting inappropriate referrals that are not in the scope of practice were among the strongest contributors to physicians’ dissatisfaction (mean 3± 1.9 and 3.9±1.3, respectively). None of the items were highly correlated with each other.

Conclusion: A simple and practical questionnaire to measure physician satisfaction was developed and successfully piloted on a predominately academic sample of rheumatologists. The strongest correlates of physician satisfaction were the “ability to make a difference in a patient’s life” and to “work with great colleagues” whereas the greatest correlates of dissatisfaction were “time spent on documentation” and “inappropriate referrals.” It is hoped that with further testing on a larger sample, this scale will serve as a means to identifying potential barriers to the implementation of performance improvement projects in the practice of Rheumatology.


Disclosure: K. Sheth, None; A. Valenzuela, None; S. Shoor, None; P. L. Ritter, None; K. Lorig, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Sheth K, Valenzuela A, Shoor S, Ritter PL, Lorig K. Development and Validation of a Rheumatologist Satisfaction with Practice Scale –“ the Rheumatologist Satisfaction Scale” (RSS) [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017; 69 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/development-and-validation-of-a-rheumatologist-satisfaction-with-practice-scale-the-rheumatologist-satisfaction-scale-rss/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2017 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/development-and-validation-of-a-rheumatologist-satisfaction-with-practice-scale-the-rheumatologist-satisfaction-scale-rss/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology