A systematic review of evidence on the links between patient experience and clinical safety and effectiveness

By C. Doyle, L. Lennox, D. Bell. BMJ Open, 2013

2,218 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Objective To explore evidence on the links between patient experience and clinical safety and effectiveness outcomes. Design Systematic review. Setting A wide range of settings within primary and secondary care including hospitals and primary care centres. Participants A wide range of demographic groups and age groups. Primary and secondary outcome measures A broad range of patient safety and clinical effectiveness outcomes including mortality, physical symptoms, length of stay and adherence to treatment. Results This study, summarising evidence from 55 studies, indicates consistent positive associations between patient experience, patient safety and clinical effectiveness for a wide range of disease areas, settings, outcome measures and study designs. It demonstrates positive associations between patient experience and self-rated and objectively measured health outcomes; adherence to recommended clinical practice and medication; preventive care (such as health-promoting behaviour, use of screening services and immunisation); and resource use (such as hospitalisation, length of stay and primary-care visits). There is some evidence of positive associations between patient experience and measures of the technical quality of care and adverse events. Overall, it was more common to find positive associations between patient experience and patient safety and clinical effectiveness than no associations. Conclusions The data presented display that patient experience is positively associated with clinical effectiveness and patient safety, and support the case for the inclusion of patient experience as one of the central pillars of quality in healthcare. It supports the argument that the three dimensions of quality should be looked at as a group and not in isolation. Clinicians should resist sidelining patient experience as too subjective or mood-oriented, divorced from the ‘real’ clinical work of measuring safety and effectiveness.

Subfields: General Health Professions

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fff7ad3e93360dced8dc5187d3f0cf60141778ea

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. Rebecca Anhang Price
2. S. Edgman-Levitan
3. R. Hays
4. C. Werner
5. William G. Lehrman
6. M. Elliott
7. Sebastian Hasler
8. Alan M. Zaslavsky

Citations in the corpus

• Trust in the health care professional and health outcome: A meta-analysis (2017, background): “First, it must be taken into account that trust and health outcomes may mutually affect each other [6, 43].”
• Examining the Role of Patient Experience Surveys in Measuring Health Care Quality (2014, background): “Search Strategy Beginning with the 40 individual studies cited by Doyle et al. (2013), we excluded studies that did not test associations between patient-reported experience measures and processes or outcomes of care (e.”