Cargando…

Traumatic journeys; understanding the rhetoric of patients’ complaints

BACKGROUND: Research on patients’ complaints about healthcare has tended to focus on the typology of complaints and complainants to homogenise complaints and better understand safety implications. Nonetheless, complaints speak to a broader spectrum of harm and suffering that go beyond formal adverse...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McCreaddie, May, Benwell, Bethan, Gritti, Alice
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6048830/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30012119
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3339-8
_version_ 1783340170324475904
author McCreaddie, May
Benwell, Bethan
Gritti, Alice
author_facet McCreaddie, May
Benwell, Bethan
Gritti, Alice
author_sort McCreaddie, May
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Research on patients’ complaints about healthcare has tended to focus on the typology of complaints and complainants to homogenise complaints and better understand safety implications. Nonetheless, complaints speak to a broader spectrum of harm and suffering that go beyond formal adverse events. Complaints about care episodes can take considerable time and effort, generate negative energy and may leave a dogged ‘minority’ embittered. METHODS: This study provides an overview of the process and rhetoric of how patients formulate written complaints. We collated a data corpus comprising 60 letters of complaints and their responses over a period of one month. This paper focuses on the complaint letters only. National Health Service (NHS) Complaint Department staff in a healthcare area in the United Kingdom (UK) anonymized the letters. We took a broad qualitative approach to analysing the data drawing upon Discourse Analysis focusing on the rhetorical and persuasive strategies employed by the complainants. RESULTS: What patients complained about related to how they complained, with complainants expending considerable effort in persuasive rhetoric that sought to legitimise the complaint drawing upon different sources of epistemic authority. The complainants struggle to be an ‘objective’ witness as the complaint evolves from an implicit neglect narrative to increasing ‘noise’ with other features such as Direct Reported Speech used to animate and authenticate the narrative. Many of the complex complaints appeared to evidence some psychological distress. This was associated with the complainants’ reports of experiencing cumulative poor health care and their repeated failure to resolve the complaint. The subsequent delicate and potentially stigmatized formal act of complaining was a source of additional distress. CONCLUSIONS: Complaints are involved narratives often predicated on the expectation they will not be given due credence. Health care staff may benefit from understanding how complaints are formulated to be able to more appropriately address the focus and extent of patients’ grievances from the outset and therefore, reduce the considerable associated harm.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6048830
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60488302018-07-19 Traumatic journeys; understanding the rhetoric of patients’ complaints McCreaddie, May Benwell, Bethan Gritti, Alice BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Research on patients’ complaints about healthcare has tended to focus on the typology of complaints and complainants to homogenise complaints and better understand safety implications. Nonetheless, complaints speak to a broader spectrum of harm and suffering that go beyond formal adverse events. Complaints about care episodes can take considerable time and effort, generate negative energy and may leave a dogged ‘minority’ embittered. METHODS: This study provides an overview of the process and rhetoric of how patients formulate written complaints. We collated a data corpus comprising 60 letters of complaints and their responses over a period of one month. This paper focuses on the complaint letters only. National Health Service (NHS) Complaint Department staff in a healthcare area in the United Kingdom (UK) anonymized the letters. We took a broad qualitative approach to analysing the data drawing upon Discourse Analysis focusing on the rhetorical and persuasive strategies employed by the complainants. RESULTS: What patients complained about related to how they complained, with complainants expending considerable effort in persuasive rhetoric that sought to legitimise the complaint drawing upon different sources of epistemic authority. The complainants struggle to be an ‘objective’ witness as the complaint evolves from an implicit neglect narrative to increasing ‘noise’ with other features such as Direct Reported Speech used to animate and authenticate the narrative. Many of the complex complaints appeared to evidence some psychological distress. This was associated with the complainants’ reports of experiencing cumulative poor health care and their repeated failure to resolve the complaint. The subsequent delicate and potentially stigmatized formal act of complaining was a source of additional distress. CONCLUSIONS: Complaints are involved narratives often predicated on the expectation they will not be given due credence. Health care staff may benefit from understanding how complaints are formulated to be able to more appropriately address the focus and extent of patients’ grievances from the outset and therefore, reduce the considerable associated harm. BioMed Central 2018-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6048830/ /pubmed/30012119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3339-8 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
McCreaddie, May
Benwell, Bethan
Gritti, Alice
Traumatic journeys; understanding the rhetoric of patients’ complaints
title Traumatic journeys; understanding the rhetoric of patients’ complaints
title_full Traumatic journeys; understanding the rhetoric of patients’ complaints
title_fullStr Traumatic journeys; understanding the rhetoric of patients’ complaints
title_full_unstemmed Traumatic journeys; understanding the rhetoric of patients’ complaints
title_short Traumatic journeys; understanding the rhetoric of patients’ complaints
title_sort traumatic journeys; understanding the rhetoric of patients’ complaints
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6048830/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30012119
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3339-8
work_keys_str_mv AT mccreaddiemay traumaticjourneysunderstandingtherhetoricofpatientscomplaints
AT benwellbethan traumaticjourneysunderstandingtherhetoricofpatientscomplaints
AT grittialice traumaticjourneysunderstandingtherhetoricofpatientscomplaints