OBJECTIVES: Internationally, healthcare quality regulators are criticized for failing to respond to patients' complaints. Patient involvement is, therefore, an important item on the policy agenda. However, it can be argued that there is a discrepancy between the patients' perspective and current regulatory approaches.This study examines whether a discrepancy exists between the perspectives of patients and regulators on healthcare quality. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 996 people who had registered a complaint with the Dutch Healthcare Inspectorate to measure expectations of and experiences with the Inspectorate. A taxonomy was used to classify their complaints into the clinical, relationship, or management domains. RESULTS: The response was 54%. More complaints about clinical issues (56%, P = 0.000) were investigated by the regulator than complaints about organizational (37%) and relational issues (51%). Patients with complaints about management issues less often indicated (13%, P = 0.002) that healthcare is improved by making their complaint than patients with complaints about clinical or relationship issues did (22%-23%). Patients who reported about relational issues with care providers attached more importance to issuing sanctions against the care provider than other patients (mean score 2.89 versus 2.62-2.68, P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The predominant clinical approach taken by regulators does not match the patients' perspective of what is relevant for healthcare quality. In addition, patients seem to be more tolerant of what they perceive to be clinical or management errors than of perceived relational deficiencies in care providers. If regulators want to give patients a voice, they should expand their horizon beyond the medical framework.
OBJECTIVES: Internationally, healthcare quality regulators are criticized for failing to respond to patients' complaints. Patient involvement is, therefore, an important item on the policy agenda. However, it can be argued that there is a discrepancy between the patients' perspective and current regulatory approaches.This study examines whether a discrepancy exists between the perspectives of patients and regulators on healthcare quality. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 996 people who had registered a complaint with the Dutch Healthcare Inspectorate to measure expectations of and experiences with the Inspectorate. A taxonomy was used to classify their complaints into the clinical, relationship, or management domains. RESULTS: The response was 54%. More complaints about clinical issues (56%, P = 0.000) were investigated by the regulator than complaints about organizational (37%) and relational issues (51%). Patients with complaints about management issues less often indicated (13%, P = 0.002) that healthcare is improved by making their complaint than patients with complaints about clinical or relationship issues did (22%-23%). Patients who reported about relational issues with care providers attached more importance to issuing sanctions against the care provider than other patients (mean score 2.89 versus 2.62-2.68, P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The predominant clinical approach taken by regulators does not match the patients' perspective of what is relevant for healthcare quality. In addition, patients seem to be more tolerant of what they perceive to be clinical or management errors than of perceived relational deficiencies in care providers. If regulators want to give patients a voice, they should expand their horizon beyond the medical framework.
Authors: Siri Wiig; Suzanne Rutz; Alan Boyd; Kate Churruca; Sophia Kleefstra; Cecilie Haraldseid-Driftland; Jeffrey Braithwaite; Jane O'Hara; Hester van de Bovenkamp Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Jackie van Dael; Tom W Reader; Alex Gillespie; Ana Luisa Neves; Ara Darzi; Erik K Mayer Journal: BMJ Qual Saf Date: 2020-02-04 Impact factor: 7.035
Authors: Renée Bouwman; Bert de Graaff; Derek de Beurs; Hester van de Bovenkamp; Ian Leistikow; Roland Friele Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-05-29 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Ingunn Aase; Eline Ree; Terese Johannessen; Torunn Strømme; Berit Ullebust; Elisabeth Holen-Rabbersvik; Line Hurup Thomsen; Lene Schibevaag; Hester van de Bovenkamp; Siri Wiig Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2021-01-30 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Rachel I Dijkstra; Ruud T J Roodbeen; Renée J R Bouwman; Antony Pemberton; Roland Friele Journal: Health Expect Date: 2021-12-20 Impact factor: 3.377