Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2019 Jun;22(3):317-326.
doi: 10.1111/hex.12885. Epub 2019 Apr 23.

Patient experience feedback in UK hospitals: What types are available and what are their potential roles in quality improvement (QI)?

Claire Marsh  1 , Rosemary Peacock  1 , Laura Sheard  1 , Lesley Hughes  1 , Rebecca Lawton  1   2
Affiliations
Review

Patient experience feedback in UK hospitals: What types are available and what are their potential roles in quality improvement (QI)?

Claire Marsh et al. Health Expect. 2019 Jun.

Abstract

Background & objectives: The comparative uses of different types of patient experience (PE) feedback as data within quality improvement (QI) are poorly understood. This paper reviews what types are currently available and categorizes them by their characteristics in order to better understand their roles in QI.

Methods: A scoping review of types of feedback currently available to hospital staff in the UK was undertaken. This comprised academic database searches for "measures of PE outcomes" (2000-2016), and grey literature and websites for all types of "PE feedback" potentially available (2005-2016). Through an iterative consensus process, we developed a list of characteristics and used this to present categories of similar types.

Main results: The scoping review returned 37 feedback types. A list of 12 characteristics was developed and applied, enabling identification of 4 categories that help understand potential use within QI-(1) Hospital-initiated (validated) quantitative surveys: for example the NHS Adult Inpatient Survey; (2) Patient-initiated qualitative feedback: for example complaints or twitter comments; (3) Hospital-initiated qualitative feedback: for example Experience Based Co-Design; (4) Other: for example Friends & Family Test. Of those routinely collected, few elicit "ready-to-use" data and those that do elicit data most suitable for measuring accountability, not for informing ward-based improvement. Guidance does exist for linking collection of feedback to QI for some feedback types in Category 3 but these types are not routinely used.

Conclusion: If feedback is to be used more frequently within QI, more attention must be paid to obtaining and making available the most appropriate types.

Keywords: Friends & Family Test; NHS Inpatient Survey; accountability; consensus exercise; feedback; hospitals; patient experience; quality improvement; wards.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Francis R. Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry. London, UK: The Stationary Office; 2013.
    1. Keogh B. Review into the quality of the care and treatment provided by 14 hospitals in England. London, UK: The Stationary Office; 2013.
    1. Berwick D. A promise to learn – a commitment to act: improving the safety of patients in England. London, UK: Department of Health; 2013.
    1. Gleeson H, Calderon A, Swami V, Deighton J, Wolpert M, Edbrooke‐Childs J. Systematic review of approaches to using patient experience data for quality improvement in healthcare settings. BMJ Open. 2016;6(8):e011907. - PMC - PubMed
    1. LaVela S, Gallan A. Evaluation and measurement of patient experience. PXJ. 2014;1(1):28‐36.

Publication types