Background: Questionnaires are usually used for the measurement of patient satisfaction, however, it is increasingly being recognized that the critical incident technique (CIT) also provides valuable insight.
Methods: Questionnaires of the "Hamburger questionnaire on hospital stay" were distributed to 650 consecutive patients before discharge. Additionally 103 interviews were conducted in which the patients were asked to describe positive and negative incidents during their hospital stay. The results of both methods were then compared.
Results: A total of 369 patients returned the questionnaire and 103 patients participated in the interviews. The duration of a single interview was between 5 and 45 min with a mean of 12.7 min+/-10.1 min standard deviation (SD). Cronbach's alpha of the questionnaire was 0.9. A total of 424 incidents were reported, 301 of them were negative compared to 123 positive events. The questionnaires and interviews yielded partly similar and partly different results at category and subcategory levels concerning the areas of weaknesses and strengths in quality performance. The CIT was more concrete but did not give results for all aspects of quality. The CIT, but not the questionnaire, was able to detect 40/56 (71%) of the positive and 33/75 (44%) of the negative reports regarding medical performance and 25/42 (60%) of the positive and 15/51 (29.4%) of the negative reports of the performance of the nurses were revealed by the CIT and not by the questionnaires.
Conclusion: The CIT gives valuable insights into the patient's perspective of strengths and weaknesses in hospital care, which might be overlooked by the questionnaire alone. However, the CIT is probably not suited for routine use because it is very time-consuming.