82
193.29
2.36
80

Recent PublicationsView all

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Patient complaints have been identified as a valuable resource for monitoring and improving patient safety. This article critically reviews the literature on patient complaints, and synthesises the research findings to develop a coding taxonomy for analysing patient complaints. Methods The PubMed, Science Direct and Medline databases were systematically investigated to identify patient complaint research studies. Publications were included if they reported primary quantitative data on the content of patient-initiated complaints. Data were extracted and synthesised on (1) basic study characteristics; (2) methodological details; and (3) the issues patients complained about. Results 59 studies, reporting 88 069 patient complaints, were included. Patient complaint coding methodologies varied considerably (eg, in attributing single or multiple causes to complaints). In total, 113 551 issues were found to underlie the patient complaints. These were analysed using 205 different analytical codes which when combined represented 29 subcategories of complaint issue. The most common issues complained about were ‘treatment’ (15.6%) and ‘communication’ (13.7%). To develop a patient complaint coding taxonomy, the subcategories were thematically grouped into seven categories, and then three conceptually distinct domains. The first domain related to complaints on the safety and quality of clinical care (representing 33.7% of complaint issues), the second to the management of healthcare organisations (35.1%) and the third to problems in healthcare staff–patient relationships (29.1%). Conclusions Rigorous analyses of patient complaints will help to identify problems in patient safety. To achieve this, it is necessary to standardise how patient complaints are analysed and interpreted. Through synthesising data from 59 patient complaint studies, we propose a coding taxonomy for supporting future research and practice in the analysis of patient complaint data.
    Full-text · Article · May 2014 · BMJ quality & safety
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite the technological and organisational advances of 21st century health-care systems, care scandals and burgeoning complaints from patients have raised concerns about patient neglect in hospitals. This article reviews the concept of patient neglect and the role of community health psychology in understanding its occurrence. Patient neglect has previously been conceptualised as a problem associated with hospital staff attitudes and behaviours, with regulation and training cited as solutions. Yet, a community health psychology perspective shows that the wider symbolic, material and relational aspects of care are crucial for understanding why patient neglect occurs and for outlining new solutions to augment existing interventions.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2013 · Journal of Health Psychology
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Inclusive, unconstrained and honest communication is widely advocated as beneficial and ethical. We critically explore this assumption by reflecting upon our research in acute care, informal care and public health. Using Habermas' ideals of dialogue to conceptualise ideal speech, we concur with observations that health care is often characterised by intractable exclusions and constraints. Rather than advocating implementing the ideals of dialogue, however, we examine how people adapt to these difficult and intransigent contexts. Non-ideal contexts, we find, sometimes call for non-ideal responses. Deception and furthering personal interests, and thus departing from the ideals of dialogue, can be adaptive responses.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2013 · Journal of Health Psychology
Information provided on this web page is aggregated encyclopedic and bibliographical information relating to the named institution. Information provided is not approved by the institution itself. The institution’s logo (and/or other graphical identification, such as a coat of arms) is used only to identify the institution in a nominal way. Under certain jurisdictions it may be property of the institution.