ArticleBMJ open2020
Using patient feedback to drive quality improvement in hospitals: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
43 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Advanced applications in chronic disease monitoring using IoT mobile sensing device data, machine learning algorithms and frame theory: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Understanding healthcare professionals' responses to patient complaints in secondary and tertiary care in the UK: A systematic review and behavioural analysis using the Theoretical Domains Framework.Health research policy and systems · 2024Pooled it
- Experience of patients considering or using checkpoint inhibitors in cancer treatment: a systematic review of qualitative research.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2024Pooled it
- The impact of prehabilitation interventions on affective and functional outcomes for young to midlife adult cancer patients: A systematic review.Psycho-oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Patient perspectives and experiences of collaborative pharmacist prescribing in the hospital inpatient setting: a cross-sectional survey.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Heavy Metal Toxicity in Clinical and Environmental Health: Sources, Mechanisms, Diagnostics, and Evidence-Based Management of Mercury, Lead, Cadmium, and Arsenic.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Exploring patients' perspectives on patient rights in Latvia: from awareness to implementation and strengthening.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Exploring the Icarus Paradox in Indonesia's Specialist Medical Education System Using the Public Perspective From Online Media: Convergent Mixed Methods Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Mapping online patient reviews onto a data-informed service-experience framework: a content analysis of tertiary hospitals in Wuxi, China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Stage-specific harm in early-stage hospitals in South Korea: a retrospective analysis using the healthcare complaints analysis tool.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Scoping Review of Kidney Patients and Providers Perspectives on Disaster Management.Kidney international reports · 2025Article
- Enhancing Learning Systems in Using Patient Experience Data: An Exploratory Mixed-Method Study in Two Italian Regions.The International journal of health planning and management · 2025Article
- Review
- Improving the healthcare user experience: an optimization model grounded in patient-centredness.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- From Risk and Vulnerability to Preparedness and Resiliency: An Opinion Piece on Championing Disaster and Emergency Risk Reduction and Management in Kidney Care.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2025Article
- Patient Experience of Inpatient Care: Insights From a Multicentered Study in Ghanaian Hospitals.Journal of patient experience · 2025Article
- Living with a permanent ostomy: a descriptive phenomenological study on postsurgical experiences in patients with colorectal cancer.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Review
- A Qualitative Review of Patient Feedback for the OPAT (Outpatient Antimicrobial Therapy) Service in Bristol.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- How does staff and patient feedback on hospital quality relate to mortality outcomes? A provider-level national study.Health services management research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAlthough different forms of patient feedback are available, their use in hospital management is still limited. The objective of this study is to explore how patient feedback is currently used in hospitals to improve quality.
designThis is a qualitative exploratory multiple case study. Data collection included nine interviews, of an average duration of 50 min, conducted between March and June 2019. Additionally, a document and secondary data analysis were performed.
settingThis study was conducted in three Brazilian hospitals selected for their solid patient feedback practises.
participantsManagers from the customer service, quality, nursing, operations, projects and patient experience departments of the three hospitals.
resultsDespite literature suggesting that organisational objectives regarding patient feedback are not clear, data show that there is managerial concern regarding the promotion of an environment capable of changing according to patient feedback. In these instances, organisational processes were structured to focus on patients' feedback and its receipt by the staff, including a non-punitive culture. Several patient feedback forms are available: voluntary events, patient surveys and informal feedback. Instruments to measure patient feedback focused on specific aspects of healthcare, to identify and clarify the problems for addressal by the management. The net promoter score was the main strategic indicator of patient feedback, used to assess the impact of improvement action.
conclusionsThe hospitals had established objectives that valued the patient's perspective. Involvement of the health team, availability of different channels for feedback and the use of quality tools are considered a good basis for using patient feedback to drive quality improvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.