Using complaints to enhance quality improvement: developing an analytical tool

Author:

Yahui Hsieh Sophie

Abstract

PurposeThis study aims to construct an instrument for identifying certain attributes or capabilities that might enable healthcare staff to use complaints to improve service quality.Design/methodology/approachPubMed and ProQuest were searched, which in turn expanded access to other literature. Three paramount dimensions emerged for healthcare quality management systems: managerial, operational, and technical (MOT).FindingsThe paper reveals that the managerial dimension relates to quality improvement program infrastructure. It contains strategy, structure, leadership, people and culture. The operational dimension relates to implementation processes: organizational changes and barriers when using complaints to enhance quality. The technical dimension emphasizes the skills, techniques or information systems required to achieve successfully continuous quality improvement.Research limitations/implicationsThe MOT model was developed by drawing from the relevant literature. However, individuals have different training, interests and experiences and, therefore, there will be variance between researchers when generating the MOT model.Practical implicationsThe MOT components can be the guidelines for examining whether patient complaints are used to improve service quality. However, the model needs testing and validating by conducting further research before becoming a theory.Originality/valueEmpirical studies on patient complaints did not identify any analytical tool that could be used to explore how complaints can drive quality improvement. This study developed an instrument for identifying certain attributes or capabilities that might enable healthcare professionals to use complaints and improve service quality.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Health Policy,General Business, Management and Accounting

Reference43 articles.

1. Allsop, J. and Mulcahy, L. (1998), “Maintaining professional identity: doctors' responses to complaints”, Sociology of Health and Illness, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 802‐24.

2. Ancona, D., Kochan, T., Scully, M., Van Maanen, J., Westney, D., Kolb, D., Dutton, J. and Ashford, S. (1999), Managing for the Future: Organizational Behavior and Processes, South‐Western College Publishing, Cincinnati, OH.

3. Baker, R. (1999), “Learning from complaints about general practitioners”, British Medical Journal, No. 318, pp. 1567‐8.

4. Bloor, G. (1999), “Organizational culture, organizational learning and total quality management: a literature review and synthesis”, Australian Health Review, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 162‐79.

5. Burke, W.W. and Litwin, G.H. (1992), “A causal model of organizational performance and change”, Journal of Management, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 532‐45.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3