Quality & Performance
Our service quality, patient feedback and safety results — reporting period June – September 2026 · Published October 2026.
Why we publish this
Revathi Medical Center believes you have a right to know how well we are caring for patients. Those responsible for governance of the hospital therefore publish, openly and regularly, the quality and performance of our services – including what patients tell us is good, what they tell us needs to improve, and where our results are still short of the standard we set ourselves.
This report is shared on our display boards, in printed form at the hospital and on our website, in line with the NABH commitment on informing the public of the quality and performance of service.
Key figures from this period
OPD patients gave feedback in September 2026
of 16 discharged inpatients rated every applicable service ‘Good’ (August 2026)
quality indicators met their target in every month reported (Jun–Sep 2026)
What is going well
Patients consistently rate doctors, nurses, pharmacy, registration, privacy and dignity highly; there were no patient falls and no ventilator-associated pneumonia or central-line bloodstream infections in the four months; ICU outcomes were better than expected every month; and hand-hygiene compliance rose steadily from 80% to 92.5%.
What we are working on
Waiting time and housekeeping as experienced by OPD patients; reporting errors in the laboratory and radiology; use of the correct prophylactic antibiotic before surgery; consent documentation; hand hygiene and staff safety precautions; and infection and injury events that occurred in September.
Outpatient (OPD) feedback — September 2026
147 outpatients gave feedback between 1 and 30 September 2026. The table shows the share of responses that were positive (Yes, Good or Excellent).
| Service | Responses | Positive | Negative feedback |
|---|---|---|---|
| Registration & billing | 147 | 100.0% | No negative response |
| Doctor consultation | 147 | 100.0% | No negative response |
| Nursing staff | 147 | 100.0% | No negative response |
| Pharmacy | 147 | 100.0% | No negative response |
| Laboratory / radiology | 140 | 99.3% | 1 ‘Fair’ rating |
| Hospital environment | 146 | 100.0% | No negative response |
| Patient rights, privacy & dignity | 146 | 100.0% | No negative response |
| Overall satisfaction | 147 | 100.0% | No negative response |
| Housekeeping | 147 | 90.5% | 14 said ‘No’ |
| Waiting time | 147 | 66.0% | 50 said ‘No’ |
Waiting time. 34% of respondents (50 of 147) answered ‘No’ when asked about waiting time. Our measured average outpatient waiting time was 17.8 minutes in September (target: 45 minutes), so we are looking at why the experience differs from the average. All 50 ‘No’ answers were given in the first half of the month; from 18 September the question was changed to a 4-point rating, so the two halves cannot be compared directly.
Housekeeping. 14 patients (9.5%) said housekeeping did not meet their expectation.
Laboratory reports. One patient reported that laboratory results took about 2 hours when 40 minutes had been promised, and another asked to be informed by message when reports are ready.
Inpatient discharge feedback — August 2026
16 patients gave feedback at discharge (1–29 August 2026) on 18 aspects of care, including reception, room cleanliness, food, courtesy and communication by doctors and nurses, medication information, billing, pharmacy, radiology, insurance help and the discharge process. Every applicable response was ‘Good’ (272 of 272); no complaint was recorded. Pain management was marked ‘not applicable’ by all 16 patients. This is a small sample, so it should be read as an indication rather than a full picture.
Our results against the standard
We measure our performance every month using the NABH (6th Edition) key performance indicators and compare each result with the benchmark set for it. Results are shown exactly as measured, including where we did not meet the target. Green = target met in every month reported; amber = met in some months; red = not met in any month.
Safe care
| Indicator | Target | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Target met |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medication errors (%) | 1% or less | 0 | 0 | 1.27 | 0.8 | Met in 3 of 4 |
| Inpatients with an adverse drug reaction (%) | 0% | 0.8 | 0.63 | 0.91 | 0 | Met in 1 of 4 |
| Unplanned return to operation theatre (%) | 0% | 1 | 0 | 1.07 | 1.8 | Met in 1 of 4 |
| Surgeries following wrong-site / wrong-patient / wrong-surgery prevention procedure (%) | 100% | 100 | 100 | 98.9 | 98.7 | Met in 2 of 4 |
| Surgical patients given appropriate prophylactic antibiotic (%) | 95% or more | 76 | 59.46 | 56.45 | 63.5 | Met in 0 of 4 |
| Prophylactic antibiotic given within 60 minutes (%) | 95% or more | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Transfusion reactions (%) | 0% | 0.6 | 1.8 | 0 | 0 | Met in 2 of 4 |
| ICU standardised mortality ratio (lower is better) | Below 100 | 28.5 | 51.28 | 78.95 | 36.36 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Return to ICU within 48 hours (%) | 0% | 0.86 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Met in 3 of 4 |
| Return to Emergency within 72 hours, same complaint (%) | 0% | 0.61 | 0.42 | 0.33 | 0.3 | Met in 0 of 4 |
| Hospital-acquired pressure ulcers (per 1,000 patient-days) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1.07 | Met in 3 of 4 |
| Patient falls (per 1,000 patient-days) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Hour-1 sepsis bundle followed (%) | 100% | 55.5 | 76.9 | 86.6 | 88.8 | Met in 0 of 4 |
| Appropriate nurse handover at shift change (%) | 100% | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Safe and rational OPD prescriptions (%) | 100% | No cases | No cases | 100 | 100 | Met in 2 of 2 |
| Records with incomplete / improper consent (%) | 0% | 2.4 | 1.4 | 2.1 | 3.8 | Met in 0 of 4 |
| Stock-outs of emergency drugs (number) | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | Met in 1 of 4 |
Infection prevention & staff safety
| Indicator | Target | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Target met |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hand hygiene compliance (%) | 100% | 80 | 87.5 | 90 | 92.5 | Met in 0 of 4 |
| Catheter-associated urinary infection (per 1,000 catheter-days) | 1 or less | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.12 | Met in 3 of 4 |
| Ventilator-associated pneumonia (per 1,000 ventilator-days) | 2 or less | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Central-line bloodstream infection (per 1,000 line-days) | 0.8 or less | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Surgical site infection (%) | 1% or less | 1.1 | 1.4 | 0 | 1.2 | Met in 1 of 4 |
| Needle-stick injuries to staff (number) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | Met in 3 of 4 |
Timeliness & diagnostics
| Indicator | Target | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Target met |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial assessment of inpatients – doctors (minutes) | Within 24 hours | 26.27 | 24.36 | 29.23 | 45.34 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Initial assessment of inpatients – nurses (minutes) | 30 minutes | 12.12 | 11.02 | 15.76 | 16.1 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Outpatient consultation waiting time (minutes) | 45 minutes | 18.2 | 24.97 | 22.4 | 17.8 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Laboratory waiting time (minutes) | 10 minutes | 3.63 | 4.05 | 3.59 | 3.5 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Radiology waiting time (minutes) | 60 minutes | 20.91 | 39.72 | 35.57 | 30.9 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Blood & blood-component issue time (minutes) | 4 hours (240 min) | 305.5 | 305.24 | 130.99 | 100.5 | Met in 2 of 4 |
| Laboratory reporting errors (per 1,000 tests) | 0 | 0.14 | 0.21 | 0.07 | 0.08 | Met in 0 of 4 |
| Radiology reporting errors (per 1,000 tests) | 0 | 4.26 | 3.29 | 3.38 | 0.52 | Met in 0 of 4 |
| Lab staff adherence to safety precautions (%) | 100% | 83.3 | 91.67 | 91.67 | 91.67 | Met in 0 of 4 |
| Radiology staff adherence to safety precautions (%) | 100% | 66.6 | 83 | 92 | 75 | Met in 0 of 4 |
Specialty care
| Indicator | Target | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Target met |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heart failure patients on beta-blocker (%) | 100% | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Heart attack patients reaching door-to-balloon ≤ 90 min (%) | 100% | 100 | 100 | No cases | No cases | Met in 2 of 2 |
| Inpatients with low blood sugar treated to target (%) | 100% | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | Met in 4 of 4 |
| Contrast-media extravasation (%) | 0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Met in 4 of 4 |
‘No cases’ means no eligible patients in that month. Small numbers of cases can make percentages change sharply from month to month. ICU standardised mortality ratio below 100 means fewer deaths than expected for the severity of illness. Benchmarks are those defined in the NABH KPI set used by the hospital.
Where we fell short and what we did about it
Laboratory reporting errors
What the results show
7 reporting errors in about 52,300 tests (June–September), against a target of zero. Examples: typing errors, a blood-group entry and a sample mix-up.
Action taken
Each error was investigated and the corrected report issued. Staff must now cross-check results against analyser printouts and verify before authorising any report. Sample labelling was re-trained, and an eyewash station was installed near the reagent area.
Radiology reporting errors
What the results show
14 errors in about 5,500 investigations (June–September); the monthly rate fell from 4.26 to 0.52 per 1,000. Most were a wrong patient name or age, or a finding image not attached.
Action taken
Patient name, ID and age are verified against registration records before a report is finalised; radiologists confirm that finding images are attached; image-transfer faults are escalated to the IT/PACS team.
Hand hygiene
What the results show
Compliance rose from 80% to 92.5%, but is still below the 100% target.
Action taken
Monthly audits continue until every area reaches the 100% target.
Prophylactic antibiotics for surgery
What the results show
Appropriate antibiotic choice was documented in 56%–76% of cases against a 95% target (timing was correct in all cases).
Action taken
Being reviewed by the Quality team.
Waiting time & housekeeping (OPD)
What the results show
See patient feedback section.
Action taken
Under review by the Quality team.
How we measure and report
Sources
Patient feedback is collected through the hospital’s own OPD and inpatient discharge feedback forms. Indicator data comes from case-sheet audits, departmental registers, and hospital information systems, collected monthly by the Quality team.
Benchmarks
Results are compared with NABH 6th Edition KPI benchmarks. Revathi Medical Center is NABH Pre-Accredited and tracks every indicator monthly.
Privacy
Patient names and personal details are never published. Results are not reported for individual doctors.
Your voice
We welcome your feedback and complaints – at any time, through the feedback forms or the reception desk. This report is updated regularly and both positive and negative feedback will continue to be published.
Issued by: Quality Department, Revathi Medical Center
Have feedback about your care?
Share it with us anytime — your voice helps us improve.