Treatment provider's knowledge of the Health and Disability Commissioner's Code of Consumer Rights.

New Zealand bioethics journal Pub Date : 2002-06-01
Philip L Townshend, J Douglas Sellman
{"title":"Treatment provider's knowledge of the Health and Disability Commissioner's Code of Consumer Rights.","authors":"Philip L Townshend,&nbsp;J Douglas Sellman","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Health and Disability Commissioner's (HDC) Code of Health and and Disability Consumers' Rights (the Code) defines in law the rights of consumers of health and disability services in New Zealand. In the first few years after the publication health educators, service providers and the HDC extensively promoted the Code. Providers of health and disability services would be expected to be knowledgeable about the areas covered by the Code if it is routinely used in the development and monitoring of treatment plans. In this study knowledge of the Code was tested in a random sample of 217 clinical staff that included medical staff, psychologists and counsellors working in Alcohol and Drug Treatment (A&D) centres in New Zealand. Any response showing awareness of a right, regardless of wording, was taken as a positive response as it was the areas covered by rights rather than their actual wording that was considered to be the important knowledge for providers. The main finding of this research was that 23% of staff surveyed were aware of none of the ten rights in the Code and only 6% were aware of more than five of the ten rights. Relating these data to results from a wider sample of treatment providers raises the possibility that A&D treatment providers are slightly more aware of the content of the Code than a general sample of health and disability service providers however overall awareness of the content of the Code by health providers is very low. These results imply that consumer rights issues are not prominent in the minds of providers perhaps indicating an ethical blind spot on their part. Ignorance of the content of the Code may indicate that the treatment community do not find it a useful working document or alternatively that clinicians are content to rely on their own good intentions to preserve the rights of their patients. Further research will be required to explain this lack of knowledge, however the current situation is that consumers cannot rely on clinicians being aware of the consumer's rights in health and disability services.</p>","PeriodicalId":87199,"journal":{"name":"New Zealand bioethics journal","volume":"3 2","pages":"16-21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Zealand bioethics journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Health and Disability Commissioner's (HDC) Code of Health and and Disability Consumers' Rights (the Code) defines in law the rights of consumers of health and disability services in New Zealand. In the first few years after the publication health educators, service providers and the HDC extensively promoted the Code. Providers of health and disability services would be expected to be knowledgeable about the areas covered by the Code if it is routinely used in the development and monitoring of treatment plans. In this study knowledge of the Code was tested in a random sample of 217 clinical staff that included medical staff, psychologists and counsellors working in Alcohol and Drug Treatment (A&D) centres in New Zealand. Any response showing awareness of a right, regardless of wording, was taken as a positive response as it was the areas covered by rights rather than their actual wording that was considered to be the important knowledge for providers. The main finding of this research was that 23% of staff surveyed were aware of none of the ten rights in the Code and only 6% were aware of more than five of the ten rights. Relating these data to results from a wider sample of treatment providers raises the possibility that A&D treatment providers are slightly more aware of the content of the Code than a general sample of health and disability service providers however overall awareness of the content of the Code by health providers is very low. These results imply that consumer rights issues are not prominent in the minds of providers perhaps indicating an ethical blind spot on their part. Ignorance of the content of the Code may indicate that the treatment community do not find it a useful working document or alternatively that clinicians are content to rely on their own good intentions to preserve the rights of their patients. Further research will be required to explain this lack of knowledge, however the current situation is that consumers cannot rely on clinicians being aware of the consumer's rights in health and disability services.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
治疗提供者对健康和残疾专员的消费者权利守则的了解。
卫生和残疾事务专员的《卫生和残疾消费者权利法典》(《法典》)在法律上界定了新西兰卫生和残疾服务消费者的权利。在《守则》出版后的头几年,卫生教育工作者、服务提供者和HDC广泛推广了《守则》。如果在制定和监测治疗计划时经常使用《守则》,则保健和残疾服务提供者应了解《守则》所涵盖的领域。在这项研究中,对217名临床工作人员(包括在新西兰酒精和药物治疗中心工作的医务人员、心理学家和咨询师)的随机抽样进行了对《守则》知识的测试。任何表示认识到某项权利的答复,无论措辞如何,都被视为积极的答复,因为对提供者来说,重要的知识是权利所涵盖的领域,而不是其实际措辞。这项研究的主要发现是,23%的受访员工不知道守则的十项权利,只有6%的人知道十项权利中的五项以上。将这些数据与更广泛的治疗提供者样本的结果联系起来,就有可能表明,残疾和残疾治疗提供者对《守则》内容的了解程度略高于健康和残疾服务提供者的一般样本,但保健提供者对《守则》内容的总体了解程度非常低。这些结果表明,消费者权利问题在供应商的心目中并不突出,这可能表明他们在道德上存在盲点。对《守则》内容的无知可能表明,治疗界不认为这是一份有用的工作文件,或者,临床医生满足于依靠自己的良好意愿来维护患者的权利。需要进一步的研究来解释这种知识的缺乏,然而,目前的情况是,消费者不能依赖临床医生了解消费者在保健和残疾服务方面的权利。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
In that case: Shane is a professional rugby player who has a contract with a Super 12 team. Response. New Zealand's ethics committees. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. Protection of health research participants in the United States: a review of two cases. Cytogeneticists' stories around the ethics and social consequences of their work: a New Zealand case study.
×
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