Background: Public reporting (PR) of healthcare (HC) provider's quality was proposed as a public health instrument for providing transparency and accountability in HC. Our aim was to assess the impact of PR on five main domains: quality improvement; patient choice, service utilization and market share; provider's perspective; patient experience; and unintended consequences. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, ISI WOS, and EconLit databases were searched to identify studies investigating relationships between PR and five main domains, published up to April 1, 2016. Results: Sixty-two papers published between 1988 and 2015 were included. Nineteen studies investigated quality improvement, 19 studies explored the unintended consequences of PR, 10 explored the effects on market share, 10 on patients' choice, 7 evaluated the provider's perspective, 4 economic outcome, 4 service utilization, 2 purchasers' use of PR and 2 studies explored patient experiences. The effect of PR was diverse throughout the studies-mostly positive on: patient experience (100%), quality improvement (63%), patient choice, service utilization and market share (46%); mixed on provider's perspective and economic outcome (27%) and mainly negative on unintended consequences (68%). Conclusions: Our research covering different outcomes and settings reported that PR is associated with changes in HC provider's behavior and can influence market share. Unintended consequences are a concern of PR and should be taken into account when allocating HC resources. The experiences collected in this paper could give a snapshot about the impact of PR on a HC user's perception of the providers' quality of care, helping them to make empowered choices.
Background: Public reporting (PR) of healthcare (HC) provider's quality was proposed as a public health instrument for providing transparency and accountability in HC. Our aim was to assess the impact of PR on five main domains: quality improvement; patient choice, service utilization and market share; provider's perspective; patient experience; and unintended consequences. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, ISI WOS, and EconLit databases were searched to identify studies investigating relationships between PR and five main domains, published up to April 1, 2016. Results: Sixty-two papers published between 1988 and 2015 were included. Nineteen studies investigated quality improvement, 19 studies explored the unintended consequences of PR, 10 explored the effects on market share, 10 on patients' choice, 7 evaluated the provider's perspective, 4 economic outcome, 4 service utilization, 2 purchasers' use of PR and 2 studies explored patient experiences. The effect of PR was diverse throughout the studies-mostly positive on: patient experience (100%), quality improvement (63%), patient choice, service utilization and market share (46%); mixed on provider's perspective and economic outcome (27%) and mainly negative on unintended consequences (68%). Conclusions: Our research covering different outcomes and settings reported that PR is associated with changes in HC provider's behavior and can influence market share. Unintended consequences are a concern of PR and should be taken into account when allocating HC resources. The experiences collected in this paper could give a snapshot about the impact of PR on a HC user's perception of the providers' quality of care, helping them to make empowered choices.