IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i1p562-d717865.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Personal and Professional Impact of Patients’ Complaints on Doctors—A Qualitative Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Bianca Hanganu

    (Legal Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Iasi, 700115 Iasi, Romania)

  • Beatrice Gabriela Ioan

    (Legal Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Iasi, 700115 Iasi, Romania)

Abstract

Background : Complaints regarding medical practice represent a harsh reality of the current world. Patients have the right to receive explanations and compensation when they are injured during the medical act, but the increased potential for exposure to complaints determines personal and professional consequences for the doctors, with significant impact on their health and practice. Thus, the aim of our research was to analyze in depth the impact of complaints on the doctors involved. Materials and methods : The authors conducted a qualitative study, using a semi-structured interview, addressed to doctors who had complaints from patients. The participants in our research were identified using an adapted version of the snowball method. Results : After the analysis of the interviews using the inductive method, nine themes resulted, seven of which are addressed in this paper: injustice, personal impact, professional impact, difficulties, supportive factors, the attitude of the hospital management and the attitude of colleagues. At the personal level, the doctors were overwhelmed by insomnia, nightmares, stress and anxiety, and at the professional level by doubts about medical decisions, fear, anxiety and the tendency to avoid patients with severe diseases. Conclusions : The study revealed that physicians who had complaints from patients are deeply affected by the complaint itself and the associated investigation procedure, even if, to a lesser extent, some of the participants found motivation for a better management of the situation. The study also showed the need for changes in the legal and medical systems in order to create mechanisms to support the doctors during the investigation process.

Suggested Citation

  • Bianca Hanganu & Beatrice Gabriela Ioan, 2022. "The Personal and Professional Impact of Patients’ Complaints on Doctors—A Qualitative Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-17, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:1:p:562-:d:717865
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/1/562/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/1/562/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhan Wang & Niying Li & Mengsi Jiang & Keith Dear & Chee-Ruey Hsieh, 2017. "Records of medical malpractice litigation: A potential indicator of healthcare quality in China," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2017-144, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Brian V Nahed & Maya A Babu & Timothy R Smith & Robert F Heary, 2012. "Malpractice Liability and Defensive Medicine: A National Survey of Neurosurgeons," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-7, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ihsan Solaroglu & Yusuf Izci & H Gokce Yeter & M Mert Metin & G Evren Keles, 2014. "Health Transformation Project and Defensive Medicine Practice among Neurosurgeons in Turkey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(10), pages 1-7, October.
    2. Robert J. Dijkstra, 2017. "Is limiting financial supervisory liability a way to prevent defensive conduct? The outcome of a European survey," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 59-81, February.
    3. Bianca Hanganu & Irina Smaranda Manoilescu & Cristian Paparau & Laura Gheuca-Solovastru & Camelia Liana Buhas & Andreea Silvana Szalontay & Beatrice Gabriela Ioan, 2022. "Why Are Patients Unhappy with Their Healthcare? A Romanian Physicians’ Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-13, August.
    4. Christian Wernz & Yongjia Song & Danny R. Hughes, 2021. "How hospitals can improve their public quality metrics: a decision-theoretic model," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 702-715, December.
    5. Kimon Bekelis & Symeon Missios & Kendrew Wong & Todd A MacKenzie, 2015. "The Practice of Cranial Neurosurgery and the Malpractice Liability Environment in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-13, March.
    6. Grigore TINICA & Mihaela TOMAZIU-TODOSIA & Gabriel-Catalin TOMAZIU-TODOSIA & Raluca Ozana CHISTOL & Diana BULGARU-ILIESCU & Cristina FURNICA, 2017. "Defensive Medicine: Myths and Realities," Book chapters-LUMEN Proceedings, in: Camelia IGNATESCU & Antonio SANDU & Tomita CIULEI (ed.), Rethinking Social Action. Core Values in Practice, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 82, pages 898-910, Editura Lumen.
    7. Mengxiao Wang & Gordon Guo‐En Liu & Nicholas Bloom & Hanqing Zhao & Thomas Butt & Tianhao Gao & Jiaqi Xu & Xia Jin, 2022. "Medical disputes and patient satisfaction in China: How does hospital management matter?," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 1327-1339, May.
    8. Ries, Nola M. & Jansen, Jesse, 2021. "Physicians’ views and experiences of defensive medicine: An international review of empirical research," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(5), pages 634-642.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:1:p:562-:d:717865. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.