10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Doctors’ perception of support and the processes involved in complaints investigations and how these relate to welfare and defensive practice: a cross-sectional survey of the UK physicians

      research-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

          Objective

          How adverse outcomes and complaints are managed may significantly impact on physician well-being and practice. We aimed to investigate how depression, anxiety and defensive medical practice are associated with doctors actual and perceived support, behaviour of colleagues and process issues regarding how complaints investigations are carried out.

          Design

          A survey study. Respondents were classified into three groups: no complaint, recent/current complaint (within 6 months) or past complaint. Each group completed specific surveys.

          Setting

          British Medical Association (BMA) members were invited to complete an online survey.

          Participants

          95 636 members of the BMA were asked to participate. 7926 (8.3%) completed the survey, of whom 1780 (22.5%) had no complaint, 3889 (49.1%) had a past complaint and 2257 (28.5%) had a recent/current complaint. We excluded those with no complaints leaving 6144 in the final sample.

          Primary outcomes measures

          We measured anxiety and depression using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder Scale 7 and Physical Health Questionnaire 9. Defensive practice was assessed using a new measure for avoidance and hedging.

          Results

          Most felt supported by colleagues (61%), only 31% felt supported by management. Not following process (56%), protracted timescales (78%), vexatious complaints (49%), feeling bullied (39%) or victimised for whistleblowing (20%), and using complaints to undermine (31%) were reported. Perceived support by management (relative risk (RR) depression: 0.77, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.83; RR anxiety: 0.80, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.87), speaking to colleagues (RR depression: 0.64, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.84 and RR anxiety: 0.69, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.94, respectively), fair/accurate documentation (RR depression: 0.80, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.86; RR anxiety: 0.81, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.87), and being informed about rights (RR depression 0.96 (0.89 to 1.03) and anxiety 0.94 (0.87 to 1.02), correlated positively with well-being and reduced defensive practice. Doctors worried most about professional humiliation following a complaint investigation (80%).

          Conclusion

          Poor process, prolonged timescales and vexatious use of complaints systems are associated with decreased psychological welfare and increased defensive practice. In contrast, perceived support from colleagues and management is associated with a reduction in these effects.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The impact of complaints procedures on the welfare, health and clinical practise of 7926 doctors in the UK: a cross-sectional survey

          Objectives The primary aim was to investigate the impact of complaints on doctors’ psychological welfare and health. The secondary aim was to assess whether doctors report exposure to a complaints process is associated with defensive medical practise. Design This was a cross-sectional anonymous survey study. Participants were stratified into recent/current, past, no complaints. Each group completed tailored versions of the survey. Participants 95 636 doctors were invited to participate. A total of 10 930(11.4%) responded, 7926 (8.3%) completed the full survey and were included in the complete analysis. Main outcome measures Anxiety and depression were assessed using the standardised Generalised Anxiety Disorder scale and Physical Health Questionnaire. Defensive practise was evaluated using a new measure. Single-item questions measured stress-related illnesses, complaints-related experience, attitudes towards complaints and views on improving complaints processes. Results 16.9% of doctors with current/recent complaints reported moderate/severe depression (relative risk (RR) 1.77 (95% CI 1.48 to 2.13) compared to doctors with no complaints (9.5%)). Fifteen per cent reported moderate/severe anxiety (RR=2.08 (95% CI 1.61 to 2.68) compared to doctors with no complaints (7.3%)). Distress increased with complaint severity, with highest levels after General Medical Council (GMC) referral (26.3% depression, 22.3% anxiety). Doctors with current/recent complaints were 2.08 (95% CI 1.61 to 2.68) times more likely to report thoughts of self-harm or suicidal ideation. Most doctors reported defensive practise: 82–89% hedging and 46–50% avoidance. Twenty per cent felt victimised after whistleblowing, 38% felt bullied, 27% spent over 1 month off work. Over 80% felt processes would improve with transparency, managerial competence, capacity to claim lost earnings and action against vexatious complainants. Conclusions Doctors with recent/current complaints have significant risks of moderate/severe depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation. Morbidity was greatest in cases involving the GMC. Most doctors reported practising defensively, including avoidance of procedures and high-risk patients. Many felt victimised as whistleblowers or reported bullying. Suggestions to improve complaints processes included transparency and managerial competence.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Positive and negative factors in defensive medicine: a questionnaire study of general practitioners.

            (a) To investigate defensive medical practices among general practitioners; (b) to compare any such practices with general practitioners' understanding of certain aspects of the terms of service and medical negligence and practitioners' concerns about the risk of being sued or having a complaint lodged. Postal questionnaire survey. Each questionnaire was followed by a reminder. 500 systematically selected general practitioners on the membership list of the Medical Defence Union. Answers to questions on defensive medical practices, understanding of certain aspects of the terms of service and medical negligence, and concerns about the risk of being sued or having a complaint lodged. 300 general practitioners returned the questionnaire (response rate 60%). 294 (98%) claimed to have made some practice changes as a result of the possibility of a patient complaining. Of the defensive medical practices adopted, the most common (over half of doctors stating likely or very likely) seemed to be increased diagnostic testing, increased referrals, increased follow up, and more detailed patient explanations and note taking. Respondents practised defensive medicine as a possible consequence of concerns about the risks of being sued or having a complaint lodged. This association was particularly strong for negative defensive practices. Defensive medical practice did not correlate with any misunderstanding about the law of negligence or the general practitioners' terms of service. General practitioners are practising defensive medicine. Some defensive practices such as increased patient explanations or more detailed note taking are clearly beneficial. However, implementing the findings of the Wilson report may increase negative defensive medical practices.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Doctors' experiences and their perception of the most stressful aspects of complaints processes in the UK: an analysis of qualitative survey data

              Objectives To examine doctors' experiences of complaints, including which aspects are most stressful. We also investigated how doctors felt complaints processes could be improved. Design and methods A qualitative study based on a cross-sectional survey of members of the British Medical Association (BMA). We asked the following: (1) Try to summarise as best as you can your experience of the complaints process and how it made you feel. (2) What were the most stressful aspects of the complaint? (3) What would you improve in the complaints system? Participants We sent the survey to 95 636 doctors, and received 10 930 (11.4%) responses. Of these, 6146 had a previous, recent or current complaint and 3417 (31.3%) of these respondents answered questions 1 and 2. We randomly selected 1000 answers for analysis, and included 100 using the saturation principle. Of this cohort, 93 responses for question 3 were available. Main results Doctors frequently reported feeling powerless, emotionally distressed, and experiencing negative feelings towards both those managing complaints and the complainants themselves. Many felt unsupported, fearful of the consequences and that the complaint was unfair. The most stressful aspects were the prolonged duration and unpredictability of procedures, managerial incompetence, poor communication and perceiving that processes are biased in favour of complainants. Many reported practising defensively or considering changing career after a complaint, and few found any positive outcomes from complaints investigations. Physicians suggested procedures should be more transparent, competently managed, time limited, and that there should be an open dialogue with complainants and policies for dealing with vexatious complaints. Some felt more support for doctors was needed. Conclusions Complaints seriously impact on doctors' psychological wellbeing, and are associated with defensive practise. This is not beneficial to patient care. To improve procedures, doctors propose they are simplified, time limited and more transparent.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2017
                21 November 2017
                : 7
                : 11
                : e017856
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology , Queen Charlotte’s & Chelsea Hospital, Imperial College London , London, UK
                [2 ] departmentDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology , University Hospitals Leuven , Leuven, Belgium
                [3 ] departmentDepartment of Development and Regeneration , KU Leuven , Leuven, Belgium
                [4 ] British Medical Association , London, UK
                [5 ] departmentLUCAS , KU Leuven , Leuven, Belgium
                [6 ] South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust , London, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Professor Tom Bourne; tbourne@ 123456ic.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1421-6059
                Article
                bmjopen-2017-017856
                10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017856
                5719304
                29162574
                9fece769-b2aa-4e48-9e16-c25821b83e43
                © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 23 May 2017
                : 20 October 2017
                : 25 October 2017
                Categories
                Health Policy
                Research
                1506
                1703
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                defensive practice,physician health,anxiety,depression,medical regulation
                Medicine
                defensive practice, physician health, anxiety, depression, medical regulation

                Comments

                Comment on this article