Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33827563›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

Victorian healthcare experience survey 2016-2018; evaluation of interventions to improve the patient experience.

Eunice Wong, Felix Mavondo, Lidia Horvat, Louise McKinlay, Jane Fisher

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Exploring Patient Mealtime Experience in an Acute Care Setting Using the Modified Austin Health Patient Mealtime Experience Tool.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eunice WongBehaviourWorks Australia, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, PO Box 8000, Monash University LPO, Clayton, VIC, 3800, Australia. eunice.wong@monash.edu.
Felix MavondoDepartment of Marketing, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Lidia HorvatSafer Care Victoria, Department of Health, Victoria, Australia.
Louise McKinlaySafer Care Victoria, Department of Health, Victoria, Australia.
Jane FisherSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Monash University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient experience is recognised as a quality of care indicator and increasingly health services are working on achieving set targets and improving their performance. Interventions at the point of care targeting communication with patients, patient engagement in care processes and discharge planning are associated with better patient experience. However, their efficacy and application to different contexts are still unclear. The aims were to describe the interventions implemented by health services to improve patient experience, their impact on overall patient experiences and specific experiences in areas of communication, discharge planning, patient education on treatment/tests, the physical environment and access to care.

methodsSecondary data analysis of the Victorian Healthcare Experience inpatient surveys reported in September 2016 and 2018 and content analysis of interventions published in the Victorian Quality Account for 2017 from 59 public health services in Victoria, Australia. The interventions were categorised using an adapted taxonomy of professional interventions by the Cochrane EPOC Review Group. Univariate tests and confirmatory factor analysis were conducted to test measure invariance across the 2016 and 2018 groups and examine the association between each of the intervention categories on overall patient experience measure and specific outcome measures.

resultsThis study found that the overall patient experience was consistent (93%) between 2016 and 2018 samples. In comparing impact, a single intervention rather than none or multiple interventions in communication, respect and dignity and treatment and disease education areas were associated with a higher level of the overall patient experience. Interventions in waiting time, access to service, care continuity and emotional support categories were associated with a decrease in overall patient experience.

conclusionThis study found that to improve the overall patient experience, more focus is needed on evidence-based interventions in dignity and respect and emotional support. Furthermore, the choice of interventions should be guided by evidence of their efficacy and prioritising implementing one intervention well, provides more gains.

Indexed as

CommunicationPatient ParticipationHealth Care SurveysHumansPatient Outcome AssessmentVictoriaAustraliaInterventionsPatient experiencePatient experience surveyPublic hospital

Identifiers

PMID33827563
PMCPMC8028773
OpenAlexW3114268357

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.