title: Investigating the Potential Contribution of Patient Rating Sites to Hospital Supervision: Exploratory Results From an Interview Study in the Netherlands.
abstract: Over the last decades, the patient perspective on health care quality has been unconditionally integrated into quality management. For several years now, patient rating sites have been rapidly gaining attention. These offer a new approach toward hearing the patient's perspective on the quality of health care.
  
  
  
  The aim of our study was to explore whether and how patient reviews of hospitals, as reported on rating sites, have the potential to contribute to health care inspector's daily supervision of hospital care.
  
  
  
  Given the unexplored nature of the topic, an interview study among hospital inspectors was designed in the Netherlands. We performed 2 rounds of interviews with 10 senior inspectors, addressing their use and their judgment on the relevance of review data from a rating site.
  
  
  
  All 10 Dutch senior hospital inspectors participated in this research. The inspectors initially showed some reluctance to use the major patient rating site in their daily supervision. This was mainly because of objections such as worries about how representative they are, subjectivity, and doubts about the relevance of patient reviews for supervision. However, confrontation with, and assessment of, negative reviews by the inspectors resulted in 23% of the reviews being deemed relevant for risk identification. Most inspectors were cautiously positive about the contribution of the reviews to their risk identification.
  
  
  
  Patient rating sites may be of value to the risk-based supervision of hospital care carried out by the Health Care Inspectorate. Health care inspectors do have several objections against the use of patient rating sites for daily supervision. However, when they are presented with texts of negative reviews from a hospital under their supervision, it appears that most inspectors consider it as an additional source of information to detect poor quality of care. Still, it should always be accompanied and verified by other quality and safety indicators. More research on the value and usability of patient rating sites in daily hospital supervision and other health settings is needed.
authors.affiliation: Dutch Health Care Inspectorate, Department of Risk Detection and Development, Utrecht, Netherlands. sm.kleefstra@igz.nl.
authors.forename: Sophia Martine
authors.identifier: 0000-0003-1291-075X
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: Kleefstra
authors.forename: Linda C
authors.identifier: 0000-0001-8859-2618
authors.initials: LC
authors.lastname: Zandbelt
authors.forename: Ine
authors.identifier: 0000-0002-7023-0261
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: Borghans
authors.forename: Hanneke J C J M
authors.identifier: 0000-0001-6541-0543
authors.initials: HJ
authors.lastname: de Haes
authors.forename: Rudolf B
authors.identifier: 0000-0003-3134-487X
authors.initials: RB
authors.lastname: Kool
mesh_terms: D003695:Delivery of Health Care / Q000592:standards*; D006739:Hospital Administration / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D009426:Netherlands; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D011787:Quality of Health Care / Q000592:standards*
keywords: hospitals; patient experiences; patient rating sites; patient satisfaction; quality of health care; supervision