ArticleInternational journal of otolaryngology2020
An Analysis of Complaints in Two Large Tertiary University Teaching Hospital ENT Departments: A Two-Year Retrospective Review.
Article in International journal of otolaryngology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Testing the Healthcare Complaints Analysis Tool in a Specialist Pediatric Hospital to Assess Potential Utility for Organizational Learning from Complaints.Journal of patient experience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this paper is to review and analyse complaints received by the ENT department of two large teaching hospitals in London in order to determine current trends and mitigate future challenges.
methodAll complaints registered with the Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS) from the ENT Department at our institution were collected between June 2016 and August 2018. Demographic information was collated and complaints were analysed and interpreted as per a standardised coding taxonomy.
resultsA total of 242 complaints were collected. Most (91.7%) were logged by patients themselves with a mean age of 48.3 (range 3-98 years). The majority were directed at the administrative team (52%) followed by management (23.5%) and then clinicians (16.9%). Administrative issues were the most common (50.1%) followed by clinical (25.1%) and relationship/communication (24.7%). The bulk of complaints focused on delays in access to services and treatment in the form of cancellations and long appointment waiting times (37%).
conclusionThere has been a significant shift in complaints themes from clinical issues to administrative issues. This may reflect increasing financial and staffing pressures in the NHS. Complaints analysis is key in quality improvement and a cross-specialty integrated filing system in concordance with the recently proposed taxonomy would ease future collection and analysis of data.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.