A mixed-methods analysis of patient reviews of hospital care in England: implications for public reporting of health care quality data in the United States
- PMID: 23367647
- DOI: 10.1016/s1553-7250(13)39003-5
A mixed-methods analysis of patient reviews of hospital care in England: implications for public reporting of health care quality data in the United States
Abstract
Background: In the United States patients have limited opportunities to read and write narrative reviews about hospitals. In contrast, the National Health Service (NHS) in England encourages patients to provide feedback to hospitals on their quality-reporting website, NHS Choices. The scope and content of the narrative feedback was studied.
Methods: All NHS hospitals with more than 10 reviews posted on NHS Choices were included in a cross-sectional mixed-methods (qualitative and quantitative) analysis of patients' reviews of 20 randomly selected hospitals.
Results: The final sample consisted of 264 hospitals and 2,640 patient responses to structured questions. All 200 reviews from the 20 hospitals randomly selected were subjected to further quantitative and qualitative analysis. Comments about clinicians and staff were common (179 [90%]) and overwhelmingly positive, with 149 (83%) favorable to workers. In 124 (62%) of the 200 reviews, patients commented on technical aspects of hospital care, including quality of care, injuries, errors, and incorrect medical record or discharge documentation. Perceived medical errors were described in 51 (26%) hospital reviews. Comments about the hospital facility appeared in half (52%) of reviews, describing hospital cleanliness, food, parking, and amenities. Hospitals replied to 56% of the patient reviews.
Discussion: NHS Choices represents the first government-run initiative that enables any patient to provide narrative feedback about hospital care. Reviews appear to have similar domains to those covered in existing satisfaction surveys but also include detailed feedback that would be unlikely to be revealed by such surveys. Online narrative reviews can therefore provide useful and complementary information to consumers (patients) and hospitals, particularly when combined with systematically collected patient experience data.
Comment in
-
Patients as reviewers of quality and safety.Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2013 Jan;39(1):5-6. doi: 10.1016/s1553-7250(13)39002-3. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2013. PMID: 23367646 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
The patient experience of patient-centered communication with nurses in the hospital setting: a qualitative systematic review protocol.JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):76-87. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1072. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015. PMID: 26447009
-
What does patient feedback reveal about the NHS? A mixed methods study of comments posted to the NHS Choices online service.BMJ Open. 2017 Apr 27;7(4):e013821. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013821. BMJ Open. 2017. PMID: 28450463 Free PMC article.
-
England's Experience incorporating "anecdotal" reports from consumers into their national reporting system: lessons for the United States of what to do or not to do?Med Care Res Rev. 2014 Oct;71(5 Suppl):65S-80S. doi: 10.1177/1077558714535470. Epub 2014 May 16. Med Care Res Rev. 2014. PMID: 24836765
-
The measurement of patients' expectations for health care: a review and psychometric testing of a measure of patients' expectations.Health Technol Assess. 2012 Jul;16(30):i-xii, 1-509. doi: 10.3310/hta16300. Health Technol Assess. 2012. PMID: 22747798 Review.
-
Patients' experiences in Australian hospitals: a systematic review of evidence.Aust Health Rev. 2017 Aug;41(4):419-435. doi: 10.1071/AH16053. Aust Health Rev. 2017. PMID: 27537609
Cited by
-
Public Awareness, Usage, and Predictors for the Use of Doctor Rating Websites: Cross-Sectional Study in England.J Med Internet Res. 2018 Jul 25;20(7):e243. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9523. J Med Internet Res. 2018. PMID: 30045831 Free PMC article.
-
A large-scale quantitative analysis of latent factors and sentiment in online doctor reviews.J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 Nov-Dec;21(6):1098-103. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002711. Epub 2014 Jun 10. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014. PMID: 24918109 Free PMC article.
-
A cross-sectional study assessing the association between online ratings and clinical quality of care measures for US hospitals: results from an observational study.BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Feb 5;18(1):82. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-2886-3. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018. PMID: 29402321 Free PMC article.
-
Exploring Patients' Views Toward Giving Web-Based Feedback and Ratings to General Practitioners in England: A Qualitative Descriptive Study.J Med Internet Res. 2016 Aug 5;18(8):e217. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5865. J Med Internet Res. 2016. PMID: 27496366 Free PMC article.
-
The Relationship between Internet Patient Satisfaction Ratings and COVID-19 Outcomes.Healthcare (Basel). 2023 May 12;11(10):1411. doi: 10.3390/healthcare11101411. Healthcare (Basel). 2023. PMID: 37239695 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical