Exploring the Factors that Drive Clinical Negligence Claims: Stated Preferences of Those Who Have Experienced Unintended Harm.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-01 DOI:10.1007/s40271-024-00674-x
Nyantara Wickramasekera, Arne Risa Hole, Donna Rowen, Allan Wailoo, Anju D Keetharuth
{"title":"Exploring the Factors that Drive Clinical Negligence Claims: Stated Preferences of Those Who Have Experienced Unintended Harm.","authors":"Nyantara Wickramasekera, Arne Risa Hole, Donna Rowen, Allan Wailoo, Anju D Keetharuth","doi":"10.1007/s40271-024-00674-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Better understanding of the factors that influence patients to make a financial claim for compensation is required to inform policy decisions. This study aimed to assess the relative importance of factors that influence those who have experienced a patient safety incident (PSI) to make a claim for compensation.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Participants completed an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) involving 10 single profile tasks where they chose whether or not to file a claim. DCE data were modelled using logistic, mixed logit and latent class regressions; scenario analyses, external validity, and willingness to accept were also conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1029 participants in the United Kingdom responded to the survey. An appropriate apology and a satisfactory investigation reduced the likelihood of claiming. Respondents were more likely to claim if they could hold those responsible accountable, if the process was simple and straightforward, if the compensation amount was higher, if the likelihood of compensation was high or uncertain, if the time to receive a decision was quicker, and if they used the government compensation scheme. Men are more likely to claim for low impact PSIs.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusions: </strong>The actions taken by the health service after a PSI, and people's perceptions about the probability of success and the size of potential reward, can influence whether a claim is made. Results show the importance of giving an appropriate apology and conducting a satisfactory investigation. This stresses the importance around how patients are treated after a PSI in influencing the clinical negligence claims that are made.</p>","PeriodicalId":51271,"journal":{"name":"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11039422/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-024-00674-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Better understanding of the factors that influence patients to make a financial claim for compensation is required to inform policy decisions. This study aimed to assess the relative importance of factors that influence those who have experienced a patient safety incident (PSI) to make a claim for compensation.

Method: Participants completed an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) involving 10 single profile tasks where they chose whether or not to file a claim. DCE data were modelled using logistic, mixed logit and latent class regressions; scenario analyses, external validity, and willingness to accept were also conducted.

Results: A total of 1029 participants in the United Kingdom responded to the survey. An appropriate apology and a satisfactory investigation reduced the likelihood of claiming. Respondents were more likely to claim if they could hold those responsible accountable, if the process was simple and straightforward, if the compensation amount was higher, if the likelihood of compensation was high or uncertain, if the time to receive a decision was quicker, and if they used the government compensation scheme. Men are more likely to claim for low impact PSIs.

Discussion and conclusions: The actions taken by the health service after a PSI, and people's perceptions about the probability of success and the size of potential reward, can influence whether a claim is made. Results show the importance of giving an appropriate apology and conducting a satisfactory investigation. This stresses the importance around how patients are treated after a PSI in influencing the clinical negligence claims that are made.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索临床过失索赔的驱动因素:经历过意外伤害者的陈述偏好。
背景:需要更好地了解影响患者提出经济赔偿要求的因素,以便为政策决策提供依据。本研究旨在评估影响患者安全事故(PSI)患者索赔的因素的相对重要性:方法:参与者完成了一项在线离散选择实验(DCE),其中包括 10 项选择是否提出索赔的单一任务。对离散选择实验数据进行了逻辑、混合逻辑和潜类回归建模;还进行了情景分析、外部有效性和接受意愿分析:结果:英国共有 1029 名参与者参与了调查。适当的道歉和令人满意的调查降低了索赔的可能性。如果能够追究责任人的责任、程序简单明了、赔偿金额较高、获得赔偿的可能性较高或不确定、获得决定的时间较快,以及使用政府赔偿计划,受访者更有可能索赔。男性更有可能就影响较小的 PSI 提出索赔:发生 PSI 后,医疗服务机构采取的行动以及人们对成功概率和潜在赔偿金额的看法,都会影响是否提出索赔。结果表明,给予适当的道歉和开展令人满意的调查非常重要。这强调了在发生 PSI 后如何对待病人对提出临床疏忽索赔的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research
Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
8.30%
发文量
44
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Patient provides a venue for scientifically rigorous, timely, and relevant research to promote the development, evaluation and implementation of therapies, technologies, and innovations that will enhance the patient experience. It is an international forum for research that advances and/or applies qualitative or quantitative methods to promote the generation, synthesis, or interpretation of evidence. The journal has specific interest in receiving original research, reviews and commentaries related to qualitative and mixed methods research, stated-preference methods, patient reported outcomes, and shared decision making. Advances in regulatory science, patient-focused drug development, patient-centered benefit-risk and health technology assessment will also be considered. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in The Patient may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances. All manuscripts are subject to peer review by international experts.
期刊最新文献
Validity and Responsiveness of EQ-5D in Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Appropriateness of the EQ-HWB for Use in Residential Aged Care: A Proxy Perspective. Eliciting Older Cancer Patients' Preferences for Follow-Up Care to Inform a Primary Healthcare Follow-Up Model in China: A Discrete Choice Experiment. Treatment Preference Research in Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review of Quantitative Studies. Practices and Barriers in Developing and Disseminating Plain-Language Resources Reporting Medical Research Information: A Scoping Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1