22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Key strategies to improve systems for managing patient complaints within health facilities – what can we learn from the existing literature?

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          ABSTRACT

          Background: Information from patient complaints – a widely accepted measure of patient satisfaction with services – can inform improvements in service quality, and contribute towards overall health systems performance. While analyses of data from patient complaints received much emphasis, there is limited published literature on key interventions to improve complaint management systems.

          Objectives: The objectives are two-fold: first, to synthesise existing evidence and provide practical options to inform future policy and practice and, second, to identify key outstanding gaps in the existing literature to inform agenda for future research.

          Methods: We report results of review of the existing literature. Peer-reviewed published literature was searched in OVID Medline, OVID Global Health and PubMed. In addition, relevant citations from the reviewed articles were followed up, and we also report grey literature from the UK and the Netherlands.

          Results: Effective interventions can improve collection of complaints (e.g. establishing easy-to-use channels and raising patients’ awareness of these), analysis of complaint data (e.g. creating structures and spaces for analysis and learning from complaints data), and subsequent action (e.g. timely feedback to complainants and integrating learning from complaints into service quality improvement). No one single measure can be sufficient, and any intervention to improve patient complaint management system must include different components, which need to be feasible, effective, scalable, and sustainable within local context.

          Conclusions: Effective interventions to strengthen patient complaints systems need to be: comprehensive, integrated within existing systems, context-specific and cognizant of the information asymmetry and the unequal power relations between the key actors. Four gaps in the published literature represent an agenda for future research: limited understanding of contexts of effective interventions, absence of system-wide approaches, lack of evidence from low- and middle-income countries and absence of focused empirical assessments of behaviour of staff who manage patient complaints.

          Related collections

          Most cited references72

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Rethinking health systems strengthening: key systems thinking tools and strategies for transformational change.

          While reaching consensus on future plans to address current global health challenges is far from easy, there is broad agreement that reductionist approaches that suggest a limited set of targeted interventions to improve health around the world are inadequate. We argue that a comprehensive systems perspective should guide health practice, education, research and policy. We propose key 'systems thinking' tools and strategies that have the potential for transformational change in health systems. Three overarching themes span these tools and strategies: collaboration across disciplines, sectors and organizations; ongoing, iterative learning; and transformational leadership. The proposed tools and strategies in this paper can be applied, in varying degrees, to every organization within health systems, from families and communities to national ministries of health. While our categorization is necessarily incomplete, this initial effort will provide a valuable contribution to the health systems strengthening debate, as the need for a more systemic, rigorous perspective in health has never been greater.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            What can hospitalized patients tell us about adverse events? Learning from patient-reported incidents.

            Little is known about how well hospitalized patients can identify errors or injuries in their care. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to elicit incident reports from hospital inpatients in order to identify and characterize adverse events and near-miss errors. We conducted a prospective cohort study of 228 adult inpatients on a medicine unit of a Boston teaching hospital. Investigators reviewed medical records and interviewed patients during the hospitalization and by telephone 10 days after discharge about "problems,"mistakes," and "injuries" that occurred. Physician investigators classified patients' reports. We calculated event rates and used multivariable Poisson regression models to examine the factors associated with patient-reported events. Of 264 eligible patients, 228 (86%) agreed to participate and completed 528 interviews. Seventeen patients (8%) experienced 20 adverse events; 1 was serious. Eight patients (4%) experienced 13 near misses; 5 were serious or life threatening. Eleven (55%) of 20 adverse events and 4 (31%) of 13 near misses were documented in the medical record, but none were found in the hospital incident reporting system. Patients with 3 or more drug allergies were more likely to report errors compared with patients without drug allergies (incidence rate ratio 4.7, 95% CI 1.7, 13.4). Inpatients can identify adverse events affecting their care. Many patient-identified events are not captured by the hospital incident reporting system or recorded in the medical record. Engaging hospitalized patients as partners in identifying medical errors and injuries is a potentially promising approach for enhancing patient safety.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Theory-Based Evaluation and Types of Complexity

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Glob Health Action
                Glob Health Action
                ZGHA
                zgha20
                Global Health Action
                Taylor & Francis
                1654-9716
                1654-9880
                2018
                16 April 2018
                : 11
                : 1
                : 1458938
                Affiliations
                [a ] Nuffield Centre for International Health and Development, University of Leeds , Leeds, UK
                [b ] Nossal Institute for Global Health, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne , Melbourne, Australia
                Author notes
                CONTACT Tolib Mirzoev t.mirzoev@ 123456leeds.ac.uk Nuffield Centre for International Health and Development, University of Leeds , 10.31b, Worsley Building, Clarendon Way, LeedsLS2 9NL, UK; Sumit Kane Sumit.Kane@ 123456unimelb.edu.au Nossal Institute for Global Health, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne , Melbourne, VIC3010, Australia
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2959-9187
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4858-7344
                Article
                1458938
                10.1080/16549716.2018.1458938
                5912438
                29658393
                24458c1c-449f-4eb5-a3af-a7ffed594ff5
                © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 29 January 2018
                : 26 March 2018
                Page count
                Tables: 2, References: 122, Pages: 15
                Funding
                Funded by: Medical Research Council 10.13039/501100000265
                Award ID: MR/P004105/1
                Funded by: joint MRC/ESRC/Wellcome/DFID health systems research initiative
                Award ID: MR/P004105/1
                The publication of this manuscript has benefited from the support of the RESPOND project (Creating responsive health systems: improving the use of feedback from service users in quality assurance and human resource management in Bangladesh), funded by the joint MRC/ESRC/Wellcome/DFID health systems research initiative, grant number MR/P004105/1; Medical Research Council [MR/P004105/1].
                Categories
                Review Article

                Health & Social care
                patient feedback,health system strengthening,accountability,responsiveness

                Comments

                Comment on this article