OBJECTIVE: Emergency department patient complaints are often justified and may lead to apology, remedial action or compensation. The aim of the present study was to analyse emergency department patient complaints in order to identify procedures or practices that require change and to make recommendations for intervention strategies aimed at decreasing complaint rates. METHODS: We undertook a retrospective analysis of patient complaints from 36 Victorian emergency departments during a 61 month period. Data were obtained from the Health Complaint Information Program (Health Services Commissioner). RESULTS: In all, 2,419 emergency department patients complained about a total of 3,418 separate issues (15.4% of all issues from all hospital departments). Of these, 1,157 complaints (47.80%) were received by telephone and 829 (34.3%) were received by letter; 1,526 (63.1 %) complaints were made by a person other than the patient. Highest complaint rates were received from patients who were female, born in non-English-speaking countries and very young or very old. One thousand one hundred and forty-one issues (33.4%) related to patient treatment, including inadequate treatment (329 issues) and inadequate diagnosis (249 issues); 1079 (31.6%) issues related to communication, including poor staff attitude, discourtesy and rudeness (444 issues); 407 (11.9%) issues related to delay in treatment. Overall, 2516 issues (73.6%) were resolved satisfactorily, usually by explanation or apology. Only 59 issues (1.7%) resulted in a procedure or policy change. Remedial action was taken in 109 issues (3.2%) and compensation was paid to eight patients. CONCLUSIONS: Communication remains a significant factor in emergency department patient dissatisfaction. While patient complaints have resulted in major changes to policy and procedure, research and intervention strategies into communication problems are indicated. In the short term, focused staff training is recommended.
OBJECTIVE: Emergency department patient complaints are often justified and may lead to apology, remedial action or compensation. The aim of the present study was to analyse emergency department patient complaints in order to identify procedures or practices that require change and to make recommendations for intervention strategies aimed at decreasing complaint rates. METHODS: We undertook a retrospective analysis of patient complaints from 36 Victorian emergency departments during a 61 month period. Data were obtained from the Health Complaint Information Program (Health Services Commissioner). RESULTS: In all, 2,419 emergency department patients complained about a total of 3,418 separate issues (15.4% of all issues from all hospital departments). Of these, 1,157 complaints (47.80%) were received by telephone and 829 (34.3%) were received by letter; 1,526 (63.1 %) complaints were made by a person other than the patient. Highest complaint rates were received from patients who were female, born in non-English-speaking countries and very young or very old. One thousand one hundred and forty-one issues (33.4%) related to patient treatment, including inadequate treatment (329 issues) and inadequate diagnosis (249 issues); 1079 (31.6%) issues related to communication, including poor staff attitude, discourtesy and rudeness (444 issues); 407 (11.9%) issues related to delay in treatment. Overall, 2516 issues (73.6%) were resolved satisfactorily, usually by explanation or apology. Only 59 issues (1.7%) resulted in a procedure or policy change. Remedial action was taken in 109 issues (3.2%) and compensation was paid to eight patients. CONCLUSIONS: Communication remains a significant factor in emergency department patient dissatisfaction. While patient complaints have resulted in major changes to policy and procedure, research and intervention strategies into communication problems are indicated. In the short term, focused staff training is recommended.
Authors: Ari-Nareg Meguerditchian; Dale Dauphinee; Nadyne Girard; Tewodros Eguale; Kristen Riedel; André Jacques; Sarkis Meterissian; David L Buckeridge; Michal Abrahamowicz; Robyn Tamblyn Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2012-07-25 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Ikenna Kingsley Ndu; Chidiebere D I Osuorah; Ogechukwu F Amadi; Uchenna Ekwochi; Bismark C Ekeh; Obinna C Nduagubam; Ifeyinwa B Okeke Journal: J Emerg Trauma Shock Date: 2020-03-19