What does trust really look like
in global medical travel
New findings from the GHA IMPACT™ Study show why visibility, communication, and continuity have become the central determinants of trust in cross-border care, and what hospitals investing in accreditation can do about it.
Download the full report
Free. Sent to your inbox. No Paywall.
What the data says
The IMPACT™ Study integrates patient, healthcare leader, and buyer responses in one framework. Three findings recur across all three groups, and together they reframe what "trust" means in international care.
41.3%
of past medical travelers could not identify whether their hospital was accredited
69%
of accredited organizations report a strongly positive impact on reputation and brand
30%
of patients did not experience both clear safety explanations and strong safety practices
The signal is reaching hospitals. It is not reaching the patients who need it most.
Trust gaps, not demand, are limiting growth.
Medical travel is becoming structural. Workforce shortages, capacity constraints, and rising chronic disease are pushing more patients across borders for timely, specialized, and affordable care. The volume is there. The infrastructure of trust is not yet keeping pace.
The IMPACT Study identifies four trust layers that determine outcomes in cross-border care: accreditation (governance), safety communication (clarity), digital readiness (continuity), and aftercare (decisive in shaping perceived quality). Each can be measured. Each can be strengthened. Most are underperforming.
For the first time, the data shows where the gap between accreditation's impact and accreditation's visibility is costing hospitals reputation, referrals, and growth.
Inside the IMPACT Report
A cross-stakeholder framework integrating patients, healthcare leaders, and buyers. Built to inform standards, accreditation, and policy.
- Why trust, not satisfaction, is now the central determinant of success in medical travel
- The visibility paradox: how accreditation drives reputation and referral growth, but only when patients know it exists
- How safety communication, not clinical performance alone, shapes perceived risk
- Why aftercare is the single most decisive factor in perceived safety
- Where digital fragmentation is breaking continuity, and what international patients actually use
- What hospital leaders, buyers, and referrers converge on as trust prerequisites
- A roadmap for hospitals investing in international patient services in the next strategic cycle
Trust is built in layers, across the patient experience.
Patients, leaders, and buyers do not always agree on what excellence looks like. They agree on what trust requires. Accreditation anchors it. Safety communication reinforces it. Digital access reduces friction. Aftercare sustains it. Pricing and payment transparency complete it. The report shows where each layer is strong, where each is weakening, and what action stakeholders aligned on patient-centered care should take next.
Quotes
"The findings make one thing unmistakable. The future of medical travel will not be decided by capacity or cost alone. It will be decided by the institutions that close the trust gap, and accreditation is the most effective tool we have to do it."
Renée-Marie Stephano
CEO
Global Healthcare Accreditation
About this research
The IMPACT Study integrates patient experience data with healthcare leader and buyer responses, surveying past and prospective medical travelers across multiple regions. Analysis uses descriptive methods (counts and percentages) to identify patterns across stakeholder groups, with chi-square testing applied to differences in trust and satisfaction between accredited and non-accredited settings. Open-ended responses are coded thematically. Demographic variables (age, gender, country of residence) inform comparative analysis. Participation was voluntary and responses were anonymous.
Continuing the research
The IMPACT Study integrates patient experience data with healthcare leader and buyer responses, surveying past and prospective medical travelers across multiple regions. Analysis uses descriptive methods (counts and percentages) to identify patterns across stakeholder groups, with chi-square testing applied to differences in trust and satisfaction between accredited and non-accredited settings. Open-ended responses are coded thematically. Demographic variables (age, gender, country of residence) inform comparative analysis. Participation was voluntary and responses were anonymous.
The trust infrastructure of medical travel is being rewritten. Read the data.
GHA built the IMPACT Study to give hospital leaders, buyers, and policy stakeholders the same evidence base. Download the full report.
