A closer look at NAPA’s approach
An overall experience score can show that a patient was dissatisfied. A useful anesthesia feedback program helps clinical leaders understand why—and gives them a way to respond.
NAPA built its program around a short survey addressing overall satisfaction, communication and comfort. In this conversation, its leaders explain how they use Q Engage to collect feedback by text and email, route concerns for follow-up and examine the comments behind the scores.
NAPA reports an approximately 25% response rate and an average score of 4.85 out of 5 across the organization. The panel explores how that feedback supports individual patient outreach, clinician coaching and broader quality improvement work.
What you will learn
- >How to focus an anesthesia survey on experiences that clinicians can influence.
- >How NAPA connects low ratings and written comments with a defined service recovery process.
- >How its team used labor and delivery comments to identify questions for deeper analysis and clinician education.
- >How a site chief uses daily feedback for private coaching, team recognition and discussions with hospital leaders.
- >What NAPA’s technology team considered when evaluating security, stability, integration and implementation.
Who should watch
Hospital and health system patient experience, quality and perioperative leaders; anesthesia practice executives; clinical chiefs; and technology leaders evaluating patient feedback programs.
Meet the panel
Brent Lee, MD, MPH, FASA
Director, Clinical Excellence and Performance Improvement, NAPA
Emily Sareen, MSN, RN, CPHQ
Director, Quality Improvement, NAPA
Keith Reitzel, MD, MBA, MSL
Anesthesiologist, Chief, NAPA
Paul Murphy
BT Director & Business Partner, Clinical, NAPA
Moderated by Ajay Singh
Chief Strategy Officer, Q Engage
Watch NAPA explain the program
Explore the survey, the clinical workflow and the lessons behind NAPA’s approach to the anesthesia patient experience.
Button: Get the full recording
Results are reported by NAPA in the webinar. The response rate and average score describe the program discussed; they are not a before-and-after measure of improvement.
