eCite Digital Repository

An empirical test of accreditation patient journey surveys: randomised trial


Greenfield, D and Hinchcliff, R and Westbrook, M and Jones, D and Low, L and Johnston, B and Banks, M and Pawsey, M and Moldovan, M and Westbrook, J and Braithwaite, J, An empirical test of accreditation patient journey surveys: randomised trial, International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 24, (5) pp. 495-500. ISSN 1353-4505 (2012) [Refereed Article]

DOI: doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzs035


Objective. To evaluate the effectiveness of utilizing the patient journey survey (PJS) method in healthcare accreditation processes. Design. Randomized trial of the PJS method in parallel with the current accreditation survey (CAS) method of the Australian Council on Healthcare Standards (ACHS). Setting. Acute healthcare organizations in Australia. Participants. Seventeen organizations, 28 organizational staff, nine surveyors and 38 patients. Main Outcome Measures. The results of each surveying method were compared. Participants provided feedback, via 18 interviews and 40 questionnaire surveys, about the benefits and disadvantages of a PJS compared to a CAS. Results. The PJS method is not as comprehensive as the CAS method for accreditation assessment. In matched assessments the majority of items were rated lower by the PJS method than by the CAS. PJSs were shown to be appropriate for assessing mandatory clinical criteria, but were less effective for assessing corporate and support criteria. The two methods diverged in their final assessments of which organizations met the accreditation threshold. Participants endorsed the use of PJSs within accreditation processes. Conclusions. The PJS methodology complements but is not a substitute for existing accreditation methods. There is significant stakeholder support for the inclusion of the PJS method within the current accreditation programme.

Item Details

Item Type:Refereed Article
Keywords:Accreditation, patient journey, tracer method, healthcare, empirical research
Research Division:Health Sciences
Research Group:Health services and systems
Research Field:Health services and systems not elsewhere classified
Objective Division:Health
Objective Group:Evaluation of health and support services
Objective Field:Evaluation of health and support services not elsewhere classified
UTAS Author:Greenfield, D (Professor David Greenfield)
ID Code:110975
Year Published:2012
Web of Science® Times Cited:15
Deposited By:TSBE
Deposited On:2016-08-24
Last Modified:2017-11-06

Repository Staff Only: item control page