Customer Healthcare Complaints in Brazil Are Seldom about Medical Errors

Author:

Ryngelblum Arnaldo1ORCID,Šostar Marko2ORCID,Andrlić Berislav2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Graduate Program in Administration, Universidade Paulista, São Paulo 04026-002, Brazil

2. Faculty of Tourism and Rural Development in Pozega, Josip Juraj University in Osijek, Vukovarska 17, 31000 Pozega, Croatia

Abstract

This study reviewed different country studies and noted that complaints in Brazil are more concentrated in complaints about being attended to and receiving access to services, rather than about clinical quality and safety issues. This paper explores the possible explanations for these differences based on the institutional logics theory and which logics actors privilege, and how they may play out in the healthcare field. To accomplish this undertaking, this study makes use of the healthcare complaint categorization developed by Reader and colleagues, which has been used by various studies. Next, a set of studies about healthcare complaints in different countries was examined to analyze the issues most common in the complaints and compare this information with the Brazilian data. This study identified three explanations why complaints about medical errors seldom occur. One group of studies highlights the hardships of local health systems. Another focuses on patient behavior. Finally, the third kind focuses on the issue of power to determine health orientation. The studies about a lack of resources do not directly explain why fewer complaints about clinical quality occur, thus helping to stress the management issues. Patient behavior studies indicate that patients may be afraid to point out medical errors or may be unaware of the procedures of how to do so, suggesting that family logic is left out of the decisions in the field. The third group of work highlights the prominence of the medical professional logic, both in terms of regulation and medical exercise.

Funder

University of Osijek

Publisher

MDPI AG

Reference60 articles.

1. The ways companies really answer consumer complaints;Ryngelblum;Mark. Intell. Plan.,2013

2. Patient complaints in healthcare systems: A systematic review and coding taxonomy;Reader;BMJ Qual. Saf.,2014

3. Using a stakeholder co-design approach to develop interventions for quality improvement based on patient complaints;Lydon;Int. J. Health Manag.,2024

4. Unmet health-care needs and human rights—A qualitative analysis of patients’ complaints in light of the right to health and health care;Sundler;Health Expect.,2020

5. Taking complaints seriously: Using the patient safety lens;Gallagher;BMJ Qual. Saf.,2015

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