Complaint handling in healthcare: expectation gaps between physicians and the public; results of a survey study

Abstract Background Patients who submit complaints about the healthcare they have received are often dissatisfied with the response to their complaints. This is usually attributed to the failure of physicians to respond adequately to what complainants want, e.g. an apology or an explanation. However, expectations of complaint handling among the public may colour how they evaluate the way their own complaint is handled. This descriptive study assesses expectations of complaint handling in healthcare among the public and physicians. Negative public expectations and the gap between these expectations and those of physicians may explain patients’ dissatisfaction with complaints procedures. Methods We held two surveys; one among physicians, using a panel of 3366 physicians (response rate 57 %, containing all kinds of physicians like GP’s, medical specialist and physicians working in a nursing home) and one among the public, using the Dutch Healthcare Consumer Panel (n = 1422, response rate 68 %). We asked both panels identical questions about their expectations of how complaints are handled in healthcare. Differences in expectation scores between the public and the physicians were tested using non-parametric tests. Results The public have negative expectations about how complaints are handled. Physician’s expectations are far more positive, demonstrating large expectation gaps between physicians and the public. Conclusions The large expectation gap between the public and physicians means that when they meet because of complaint, they are likely to start off with opposite expectations of the situation. This is no favourable condition for a positive outcome of a complaints procedure. The negative public preconceptions about the way their complaint will be handled will prove hard to change during the process of complaints handling. People tend to see what they thought would happen, almost inevitably leading to a negative judgement about how their complaint was handled.

Tags
Data and Resources
To access the resources you must log in

This item has no data

Identity

Description: The Identity category includes attributes that support the identification of the resource.

Field Value
PID https://www.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3607310
PID https://www.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3607310.v1
URL https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3607310
URL https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3607310.v1
Access Modality

Description: The Access Modality category includes attributes that report the modality of exploitation of the resource.

Field Value
Access Right not available
Attribution

Description: Authorships and contributors

Field Value
Author R. Friele, 0000-0002-5602-826X
Author P. Reitsma
Author J. Jong
Publishing

Description: Attributes about the publishing venue (e.g. journal) and deposit location (e.g. repository)

Field Value
Collected From Datacite
Hosted By figshare
Publication Date 2016-12-14
Publisher Figshare
Additional Info
Field Value
Language Undetermined
Resource Type Dataset
keyword FOS: Biological sciences
keyword FOS: Health sciences
system:type dataset
Management Info
Field Value
Source https://science-innovation-policy.openaire.eu/search/dataset?datasetId=dedup_wf_001::919c0940efe0179a9e2e6738ff1d6128
Author jsonws_user
Last Updated 4 January 2021, 18:50 (CET)
Created 4 January 2021, 18:50 (CET)