Table 3 Adjusted Odds Ratios for high Overall Satisfaction with Medical Appraisals
From: Satisfaction of staff of Swiss insurance companies with medical appraisals: a cross sectional study
Odds ratio (95%-CI)* | p-value | |
|---|---|---|
Item 1: Inclusion of pre-existing information | ||
Not sufficiently addressed | Reference | |
Sufficiently addressed | 1.27 (0.51-3.16) | 0.61 |
Item 2: Formal structure | ||
Badly structured | Reference | |
Well structured | 1.48 (0.27-8.16) | 0.66 |
Item 3: Presentation of content | ||
Not comprehensibly presented | Reference | |
Comprehensibly presented | 1.60 (0.17-14.8) | 0.68 |
Item 4: Response to key questions | ||
Response not complete | Reference | |
Response complete | 2.80 (1.62-4.84) | <0.001 |
Item 5: Conclusions | ||
Badly founded and not sufficiently comprehensible | Reference | |
Well founded and comprehensible | 10.1 (1.14-89.3) | 0.04 |
Item 6: Additional queries to the assessor | ||
Additional queries necessary | Reference | |
No additional queries necessary | 3.68 (1.50-9.07) | 0.005 |
Item 7: Volume of the appraisal | ||
Too short or too long | Reference | |
Just as short/as long as necessary | 2.16 (1.26-3.71) | 0.005 |
Item 8: Time interval for preparation of appraisal | ||
Too long | Reference | |
Adequately long | 5.85 (4.26-8.02) | <0.001 |
Item 9: Is the appraisal „worth its price"? | ||
No or partly | Reference | |
Yes | 5.66 (3.24-9.88) | <0.001 |
Number of disciplines involved in appraisal | ||
Mono-disciplinary appraisal | Reference | |
Bi- or Poly-disciplinary appraisal | 1.36 (1.17-1.58) | <0.001 |
Personal characteristics of insurance staff | ||
Years of professional experience (per additional year) | 0.99 (0.98-1.01) | 0.41 |