Patient claims and complaints data for improving patient safety

Author:

Jonsson Pia Maria,Øvretveit John

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to describe patient complaints and claims data from Swedish databases and assess their value for scientific research and practical health care improvement.Design/methodology/approachThe article first describes previous research into patient claims and similar schemes. It then presents three types of data on patient claims and complaints in Sweden: data generated by the Patient Insurance Fund, the Medical Responsibility Board and the Patients' Advisory Committees and considers methodological issues in using the data.FindingsThe databases' value is problems related to spontaneous reporting, which makes it difficult to know how much the data correspond to general injury rates and health care patterns. Another issue is the balance between the size of study materials and the timeliness, e.g. when diagnosis‐specific analysis requires data pooling over several years in order to reach adequate case numbers. Adjustment for confounders not present in the databases, e.g. data on hospital case‐mix, may add to difficulties using the data in comparative analyses of safety performanceResearch limitations/implicationsThe databases' safety analysis and quality improvement value depends on understanding their function, data collection method and their limitations as a source of data about the true incidence and prevalence of injuries and safety problems.Originality/valueThis is the first thorough review of the possibilities and limitations associated with the use of claims and complaints data in health care research and improvement.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Health Policy,General Business, Management and Accounting

Reference61 articles.

1. Adamson, T.E., Tschann, J.M., Gullion, D.S. and Oppenberg, A.A. (1989), “Physician communication skills and malpractice claims. A complex relationship”, The Western Journal of Medicine, Vol. 150 No. 3, pp. 356‐60.

2. Agency for Health Care Research and Quality, AHRQ (2006), Patient Safety Indicators Overview, available at: www.qualityindicators.ahrq.gov/psi_overview.htm.

3. Appelros, P., Högerås, N. and Terent, A. (2003), “Case ascertainment in stroke studies: the risk of selection bias”, Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, Vol. 107 No. 2, pp. 145‐9.

4. Arnetz, B. and Arnetz, J. (2002), “Patients' views of the health services – what do complaints to the patients' advisory committee tell us?”, Sweden's Health Care Report 2001, The National Board of Health and Welfare, Stockholm, pp. 330‐8.

5. Baker, G.R., Norton, P.G., Flintoft, V., Blais, R., Brown, A., Cox, J., Etchells, E., Ghali, W.A., Hebert, P., Majumdar, S.R., O'Beirne, M., Palacios‐Derflingher, L., Reid, R.J., Sheps, S. and Tamblyn, R. (2004), “The Canadian Adverse Events Study: the incidence of adverse events among hospital patients in Canada”, Canadian Medical Association Journal, Vol. 170 No. 11, pp. 1678‐86.

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