Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29112776›Full record

ReviewHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2018

A meta-ethnography of the facilitators and barriers to successful implementation of patient complaints processes in health-care settings.

David A H Scott, Suzanne M Grant

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Protecting Personhood: A Classic Grounded Theory.Qualitative health research · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. A meta-ethnography of the facilitators and barriers to successful implementation of patient complaints processes in health-care settings.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

David A H ScottBristol Dental School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9083-580X
Suzanne M GrantPopulation Health Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo synthesize experiences of the patient complaints process for patients and health-care professionals to identify facilitators and barriers in the successful implementation of patient complaints processes. This will assist the development of cultural change programmes, enabling complaints managers to incorporate stakeholder perspectives into future care.

designSystematic literature search and meta-ethnography, comprising reciprocal syntheses of "patient" and "professional" qualitative studies, combined to form a "line-of-argument" embodying both perspectives. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO (database inception to April 2015) were searched to identify international literature in primary and secondary health-care settings, involving qualitative data collection and analysis. Further studies were identified from hand-searching relevant journals, contacting authors, article reference lists and Google Scholar.

resultsA total of 13 papers, reporting 9 studies from the United Kingdom, Sweden, Australia and New Zealand, were included in the synthesis. Facilitators and barriers to the successful implementation of patient complaints processes were identified across the perspectives of both patients and health-care professionals. Patients sought to individualize the complaints process by targeting specific professionals who engaged in practices that undermined the identity of patients. In contrast, professionals obscured their own individualism through maintaining a collective identity and withholding personal judgement in relation to patient complaints.

conclusionsComplainants recognized health-care professionals as bearers of individual accountability for unsatisfactory care, in opposition to the stance of collective responsibility endorsed by professionals. Implementation of patient complaints processes must reconcile the need for individualized resolution, whilst striving to improve the future provision of health care through a collaborative approach between patients and professionals.

Indexed as

Dissent and DisputesPatient SatisfactionProfessional-Patient RelationsAdolescentAdultAgedAnthropology, CulturalAustraliaDelivery of Health CareFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMiddle AgedNew ZealandPatientsmeta-ethnographypatient complaintspatient dissatisfactionpatient perspectivesprofessional perspectivesqualitative research synthesis

Identifiers

PMID29112776
PMCPMC5867320

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.