Background Although NHS organisations have access to a wealth of patient experience data in various formats (e.g. surveys, complaints and compliments, patient stories and online feedback), not enough attention has been paid to understanding how patient experience data translate into improvements in the quality of care. Objectives The main aim was to explore and enhance the organisational strategies and practices through which patient experience data are collected, interpreted and translated into quality improvements in acute NHS hospital trusts in England. The secondary aim was to understand and optimise the involvement and responsibilities of nurses in senior managerial and front-line roles with respect to such data. Design The study comprised two phases. Phase 1 consisted of an actor–network theory-informed ethnographic study of the ‘journeys’ of patient experience data in five acute NHS hospital trusts, particularly in cancer and dementia services. Phase 2 comprised a series of Joint Interpretive Forums (one cross-site and one at each trust) bringing together different stakeholders (e.g. members of staff, national policy-makers, patient/carer representatives) to distil generalisable principles to optimise the use of patient experience data. Setting Five purposively sampled acute NHS hospital trusts in England. Results The analysis points to five key themes: (1) each type of data takes multiple forms and can generate improvements in care at different stages in its complex ‘journey’ through an organisation; (2) where patient experience data participate in interactions (with human and/or non-human actors) characterised by the qualities of autonomy (to act/trigger action), authority (to ensure that action is seen as legitimate) and contextualisation (to act meaningfully in a given situation), quality improvements can take place in response to the data; (3) nurses largely have ultimate responsibility for the way in which data are collected, interpreted and used to improve care, but other professionals also have important roles that could be explored further; (4) formalised quality improvement can confer authority to patient experience data work, but the data also lead to action for improvement in ways that are not formally identified as quality improvement; (5) sense-making exercises with study participants can support organisational learning. Limitations Patient experience data practices at trusts performing ‘worse than others’ on the Care Quality Commission scores were not examined. Although attention was paid to the views of patients and carers, the study focused largely on organisational processes and practices. Finally, the processes and practices around other types of data were not examined, such as patient safety and clinical outcomes data, or how these interact with patient experience data. Conclusions NHS organisations may find it useful to identify the local roles and processes that bring about autonomy, authority and contextualisation in patient experience data work. The composition and expertise of patient experience teams could better complement the largely invisible nursing work that currently accounts for a large part of the translation of data into care improvements. Future work To date, future work has not been planned. Study registration NIHR 188882. Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Hospitals are awash with patient experience data, much of it collected with the ostensible purpose of improving the quality of patient care. However, there has been comparatively little consideration of the nature and capacities of data itself. Using insights from actor-network theory, we propose that paying attention to patient experience data as having agency in particular hospital interactions allows us to better trace how and in what circumstances data lead (or fail to lead) to quality improvement.

Over the last three decades, sociomaterial approaches to the study of health care practices have made an important contribution to the sociology of health care. Significant attention has been paid to the role of technology and artefacts in health care and the operation of actor‐networks but less space has been given to questions of ontological multiplicity in health care practices. In this paper, we draw upon our study of patient experience data in five acute hospitals in England to illustrate how treating patient experience data as ‘singular‐multiples’ can enable useful insights into patient experience data work in health care organisations. Our data was generated during 12 months of fieldwork at five participating hospitals and included organisational documents, field notes, informal and formal interviews with frontline and managerial staff and patient representatives at the study sites. We use the examples of the Friends and Family Test (FFT) and the National Cancer Patient Experience Survey (NCPES) in England to consider the multiple nature of data as it is enacted in practice and the work data does when coordinated as an entity in the singular. We argue that, and discuss how, the sociomaterial insights we discuss here are relevant to health care quality and improvement research and practice.

PurposeTo investigate ethnographically how patient experience data, as a named category in healthcare organisations, is actively “made” through the co-creative interactions of data, people and meanings in English hospitals.Design/methodology/approachThe authors draw on fieldnotes, interview recordings and transcripts produced from 13 months (2016–2017) of ethnographic research on patient experience data work at five acute English National Health Service (NHS) hospitals, including observation, chats, semi-structured interviews and documentary analysis. Research sites were selected based on performance in a national Adult Inpatient Survey, location, size, willingness to participate and research burden. Using an analytical approach inspired by actor–network theory (ANT), the authors examine how data acquired meanings and were made to act by clinical and administrative staff during a type of meeting called a “learning session” at one of the hospital study sites.FindingsThe authors found that the processes of systematisation in healthcare organisations to act on patient feedback to improve to the quality of care, and involving frontline healthcare staff and their senior managers, produced shifting understandings of what counts as “data” and how to make changes in response to it. Their interactions produced multiple definitions of “experience”, “data” and “improvement” which came to co-exist in the same systematised encounter.Originality/valueThe article's distinctive contribution is to analyse how patient experience data gain particular attributes. It suggests that healthcare organisations and researchers should recognise that acting on data in standardised ways will constantly create new definitions and possibilities of such data, escaping organisational and scholarly attempts at mastery.