You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

XML
Original research
Pedagogical value of a hospitality awards programme
  1. Gérard Reach1,2,
  2. Sophie Bentégeat3,
  3. Isabelle Mounier-Emeury3,
  4. Brigitte Le Cossec3,
  5. Sadiyé Yesilmen3,
  6. Vincent Hirsch1,
  7. Yohann de Oliveira Granja1,
  8. Audrey Minetti1
  1. 1 Direction Qualité, Accueil du Patient, et Opérations, Groupe Hospitalier Hôpitaux Universitaires Paris-Seine Saint-Denis, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Bobigny, France
  2. 2 Laboratoire Éducations et Pratiques de Santé, EA 3412, Université Paris 13, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Bobigny, France
  3. 3 Direction Patients, Usagers et Associations, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
  1. Correspondence to Professor Gérard Reach; gerard.reach{at}aphp.fr

Abstract

Objective Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), the leading university hospital in France, proposed to offer its services to candidate on a voluntary basis for a hospitality award, certifying compliance to a 240-item home-made questionnaire designed by healthcare providers and patients’ representatives. It combined an objective examination of the services and patients’ questionnaires, covering seven domains: reception and information from admission to discharge; cleanliness, comfort and environment; proposed services (eg, access to Wi-Fi); culture, relaxation and well-being; meals; linen and relationship quality with hospital staff. The procedure was completed in two steps: an initial self-evaluation to detect improvable deficiencies, followed by an awarding visit. A service received the hospitality award if at least 80% of the reference criteria were met during this second evaluation. Here, we describe the construction of this hospitality awards programme and present a comparison of the scores obtained during the two steps.

Design and methods Retrospective comparison by usual statistical tests.

Setting AP-HP, grouping 39 university hospitals (21 000 beds, 8 million annual patient visits).

Participants The 211 services from 29 different hospitals engaged in the procedure (2017–2019).

Results Only one service did not get the award (self-evaluation 83%, visit score 79%). The score was higher during the awarding visit (89.0%±5.6%) than during self-evaluation (85.5%±4.3%, n=211, p<0.00001), with increased scores for the following domains (p<0.005): patient reception and information; cleanliness, comfort and environment; proposed services; culture, relaxation and well-being.

Conclusion (1) Internal self-evaluation is feasible. (2) By diffusing criteria of hospitality, the procedure had a pedagogical value leading to rapid and significant improvements. (3) This quality assessment procedure results in an award that can be posted in the departments. By appealing to pride, this procedure should promote hospitality in hospitals.

  • hospital
  • hospitality
  • award
  • values
  • person-centred medicine

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2018-000576

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors GR, SB, IME, BLC and SY participated in the design of the hospitality awards procedure. GR, IME, BLC, SY, VH, YOG and AM participated in some of the self-evaluation and awarding visits. GR designed the evaluation described herein, performed data analysis and wrote the paper, which was approved by all authors. GR, the lead author and manuscript’s guarantor, affirms that the manuscript is an honest, accurate and transparent account of the study being reported; that no important aspects of the study have been omitted and that there is no discrepancy from the study as planned. He has the right to grant on behalf of all authors a non-exclusive licence on a worldwide basis to the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd to permit this article to be published in BMJ editions.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests All authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form and declare no support from any organisation for the submitted work. In the section ‘Other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work’, they indicated that they are employees of Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris who registered a patent on the hospitality labelling procedure.

    • Patient consent for publication Obtained.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Data availability statement Data are available upon reasonable request.