Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health logoLink to Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
. 1998 Dec;52(12):802–807. doi: 10.1136/jech.52.12.802

A randomised controlled trial of postal versus interviewer administration of a questionnaire measuring satisfaction with, and use of, services received in the year before death

J Addington-Hall, L Walker, C Jones, S Karlsen, M McCarthy
PMCID: PMC1756658  PMID: 10396521

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To develop a short form of an interview schedule used successfully in previous national surveys of care for the dying, and to investigate the effect of administering it by post on response rate, response bias and on the nature of responses to questions. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: An inner London health authority. PARTICIPANTS: Informants (person registering death) of random sample of cancer deaths between June 1995 and July 1996. MAIN RESULTS: The shortened questionnaire (VOICES) has 158 questions. Response rate did not differ significantly between postal and interview groups (interview; 56% (69 of 123), postal: 52% (161 of 308). Responders in the two groups did not differ in terms of their sociodemographic characteristics. Postal questionnaires had significantly more missing data, particularly on questions about service provision and satisfaction with services. Responses to questions differed between the groups on 11 of 158 questions. Interview group respondents were more likely to give top ranking responses to questions on service satisfaction and symptom control. CONCLUSIONS: Postal questionnaires are an acceptable alternative to interviews in retrospective post- bereavement surveys of care for the dying, at least in terms of response rate and response bias. However, the increased costs of interview surveys need to be balanced against the fact that postal questionnaires result in more missing data, and possibly less reliable answers to some questions. Caution is needed in combining results from the two data collection methods as interview respondents gave more positive answers to some questions.

 

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (129.3 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Addington-Hall J. M., MacDonald L. D., Anderson H. R. Can the Spitzer Quality of Life Index help to reduce prognostic uncertainty in terminal care? Br J Cancer. 1990 Oct;62(4):695–699. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1990.360. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Addington-Hall J. M., MacDonald L. D., Anderson H. R., Chamberlain J., Freeling P., Bland J. M., Raftery J. Randomised controlled trial of effects of coordinating care for terminally ill cancer patients. BMJ. 1992 Nov 28;305(6865):1317–1322. doi: 10.1136/bmj.305.6865.1317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Addington-Hall J., McCarthy M. Regional Study of Care for the Dying: methods and sample characteristics. Palliat Med. 1995 Jan;9(1):27–35. doi: 10.1177/026921639500900105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cartwright A. Interviews or postal questionnaires? Comparisons of data about women's experiences with maternity services. Milbank Q. 1988;66(1):172–189. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Cartwright A. Some experiments with factors that might affect the response of mothers to a postal questionnaire. Stat Med. 1986 Nov-Dec;5(6):607–617. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780050608. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Eve A., Smith A. M., Tebbit P. Hospice and palliative care in the UK 1994-5, including a summary of trends 1990-5. Palliat Med. 1997 Jan;11(1):31–43. doi: 10.1177/026921639701100104. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Higginson I., Priest P., McCarthy M. Are bereaved family members a valid proxy for a patient's assessment of dying? Soc Sci Med. 1994 Feb;38(4):553–557. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)90251-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hinton J. How reliable are relatives' retrospective reports of terminal illness? Patients and relatives' accounts compared. Soc Sci Med. 1996 Oct;43(8):1229–1236. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(95)00437-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Jacoby A. Possible factors affecting response to postal questionnaires: findings from a study of general practitioner services. J Public Health Med. 1990;12(2):131–135. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubmed.a042530. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Lynn J., Harrell F., Jr, Cohn F., Wagner D., Connors A. F., Jr Prognoses of seriously ill hospitalized patients on the days before death: implications for patient care and public policy. New Horiz. 1997 Feb;5(1):56–61. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Pless I. B., Miller J. R. Apparent validity of alternative survey methods. J Community Health. 1979 Fall;5(1):22–27. doi: 10.1007/BF01321567. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Seale C. F. What happens in hospices: a review of research evidence. Soc Sci Med. 1989;28(6):551–559. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(89)90249-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Siemiatycki J. A comparison of mail, telephone, and home interview strategies for household health surveys. Am J Public Health. 1979 Mar;69(3):238–245. doi: 10.2105/ajph.69.3.238. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Smith W. C., Crombie I. K., Campion P. D., Knox J. D. Comparison of response rates to a postal questionnaire from a general practice and a research unit. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1985 Nov 23;291(6507):1483–1485. doi: 10.1136/bmj.291.6507.1483. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES