Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/33022
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMcCreaddie, Mayen_UK
dc.contributor.authorBenwell, Bethanen_UK
dc.contributor.authorGritti, Aliceen_UK
dc.date.accessioned2021-08-05T00:00:40Z-
dc.date.available2021-08-05T00:00:40Z-
dc.date.issued2021en_UK
dc.identifier.other696en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/33022-
dc.description.abstractBackground Healthcare complaints are grievances that may be indicative of some system failures, individual failings, or a combination of both. Moreover, the experience of making a complaint, including its outcome, often falls short of patient expectations, particularly in relation to the interpersonal conduct of National Health Service (NHS) staff. Over half of unresolved (local) complaints are subsequently upheld by the ombudsman with others potentially resulting in costly litigation. Method A nuanced discourse analytical approach to analysing the language choices within complaint-responses could potentially provide greater insight into why many local complaints continue to remain unresolved. Over a period of 1 month we collated a data corpus of written complaints and their responses (n = 60) from an NHS healthcare area in Scotland, United Kingdom (UK) following anonymisation by NHS complaint handling staff. We took a qualitative approach to analysing the data drawing upon Discourse Analysis with this paper reporting on the complaint-responses only (n = 59). We had undertaken a similar review of the initial written complaints and this is reported elsewhere. In this paper we examine how, and to what extent, the complaint-responses fully addressed the complainants’ perceived grievances. Results The complaint-responses rarely acknowledged the amount of detail or ‘work’ involved in making the complaint. Complaint-responses constructed complainants’ accounts as subjective by using specific discourse strategies. Further, complaint responses used unintentionality or exceptionality to mitigate sub-standard experiences of care. We also observed the ‘fauxpology’ - a non-apology or false apology (e.g. I am sorry you feel) which imputes the cause of distress to the subjective (and possibly misguided) impressions of the complainant. The complaint-responses thereby evade blame or responsibility for the complainable action by implying that the complainants’ feelings do not align with the facts. Conclusions Complainants and complaint-responders work to different frames of reference. Complaint responders need to engage and align with complainants from the outset to ensure more appropriate complaint- responses. Complaint resolution as opposed to complaint handling could be enhanced by the approach of linguistic analysis and reference to the consumer literature’s justice-based approach to post-complaint behaviour.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherBMCen_UK
dc.relationMcCreaddie M, Benwell B & Gritti A (2021) A qualitative study of National Health Service (NHS) complaint-responses. BMC Health Services Research, 21, Art. No.: 696. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06733-5en_UK
dc.rightsThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.en_UK
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_UK
dc.subjectHealthcare complaintsen_UK
dc.subjectComplaint resolutionen_UK
dc.subjectQualitative studyen_UK
dc.subjectComplaint-responsesen_UK
dc.subjectRhetoricen_UK
dc.subjectDiscourse analysisen_UK
dc.subjectComplaint handlingen_UK
dc.titleA qualitative study of National Health Service (NHS) complaint-responsesen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12913-021-06733-5en_UK
dc.identifier.pmid34266429en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleBMC Health Services Researchen_UK
dc.citation.issn1472-6963en_UK
dc.citation.volume21en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusVoR - Version of Recorden_UK
dc.citation.date15/07/2021en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationRoyal College of Surgeons (Ireland)en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationEnglish Studiesen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationNewbattle Abbey Collegeen_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000675235900002en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85110128540en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1745460en_UK
dc.date.accepted2021-06-29en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-06-29en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2021-08-04en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_UK
local.rioxx.authorMcCreaddie, May|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorBenwell, Bethan|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorGritti, Alice|en_UK
local.rioxx.projectInternal Project|University of Stirling|https://isni.org/isni/0000000122484331en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2021-08-04en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/|2021-08-04|en_UK
local.rioxx.filenames12913-021-06733-5.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source1472-6963en_UK
Appears in Collections:Literature and Languages Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
s12913-021-06733-5.pdfFulltext - Published Version590.46 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.