...
首页> 外文期刊>International journal of health care quality assurance >Do clinical incidents, complaints and medicolegal claims overlap?
【24h】

Do clinical incidents, complaints and medicolegal claims overlap?

机译:临床事件,投诉和法医学要求是否重叠?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose - Error reporting by healthcare staff, patient-derived complaints and patient-derived medico-legal claims are three separate processes present in most healthcare systems. It is generally assumed that all relate to the same cases. Given the high costs associated with these processes and strong desire to maximise quality and standards, the purpose of this paper is to see whether it was indeed the case that most complaints and claims related to medical errors and the relative resource allocation to each group. Design/methodology/approach - Electronic databases for clinical error recording, patient complaints and medico-legal claims in a large NHS healthcare provider organisation were reviewed and case overlap analysed. Findings - Most complaints and medico-legal claims do not associate with a prior clinical error. Disproportionate resource is required for a small number of complaints and the medico-legal claims process. Most complaints and claims are not upheld. Research limitations/implications - The authors have only looked at data from one healthcare provider and for one period. It would be useful to analyse other healthcare organisations over a longer time period. The authors were unable to access data on secondary staffing costs, which would have been informative. As the medico-legal process can go on for many years, the authors do not know the ultimate outcomes for all cases. The authors also do not know how many medico-legal cases were settled out of court pragmatically to minimise costs. Practical implications - Staff error reporting systems and patient advisory services seem to be efficient and working well. However, the broader complaints and claims process is costing considerable time and money, yet may not be useful in driving up standards. System changes to maximise helpful complaints and claims, from a quality and standards perspective, and minimise unhelpful ones are recommended. Originality/value - This study provides important data on the lack of overlap between errors, complaints and claims cases.
机译:目的-医疗保健人员的错误报告,患者衍生的投诉和患者衍生的医疗法律索赔是大多数医疗保健系统中存在的三个独立过程。通常假定所有案例都涉及相同的案例。鉴于与这些过程相关的高成本以及强烈希望最大化质量和标准的可能性,本文的目的是了解大多数投诉和主张是否确实与医疗错误以及将相关资源分配给每个群体有关的情况。设计/方法/方法-审查了大型NHS医疗保健提供者组织中用于临床错误记录,患者投诉和法医学主张的电子数据库,并分析了病例重叠。调查结果-大多数投诉和医学法律要求均与先前的临床错误无关。少数投诉和医学法律索赔过程需要不成比例的资源。大多数投诉和主张都不成立。研究的局限性/意义-作者仅查看了一名医疗保健提供者提供的数据,使用了一段时间。在更长的时间内分析其他医疗机构将很有用。作者无法访问有关中学人员成本的数据,这本来可以提供信息。由于医疗法律程序可以持续很多年,因此作者并不知道所有案件的最终结果。作者还不知道有多少务实的法律案件被实用地解决了,以最大程度地降低成本。实际意义-员工错误报告系统和患者咨询服务似乎是有效的并且运作良好。但是,更广泛的投诉和索赔流程花费大量时间和金钱,但可能对提高标准没有帮助。建议从质量和标准的角度对系统进行更改,以最大程度地增加有用的投诉和主张,并尽量减少无用的投诉和主张。原创性/价值-这项研究提供了有关错误,投诉和索赔案件之间没有重叠的重要数据。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号