BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Talks.cam//talks.cam.ac.uk//
X-WR-CALNAME:Talks.cam
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:CANCELLED: How perspectives from social sciences can help address 
 practical questions of healthcare improvement - Dr Alex Gillespie\, Depart
 ment of Psychological and Behavioural Science\, London School of Economics
 \, and Dr Mary Adams\, Senior Research Fellow\, King’s College London
DTSTART:20200324T140000Z
DTEND:20200324T160000Z
UID:TALK139375@talks.cam.ac.uk
CONTACT:Lucy Lloyd
DESCRIPTION:*Please "register here":https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/explori
 ng-healthcare-staff-responses-to-patient-complaints-tickets-61778615502 fo
 r this event: seats are limited*\n\nAbstract: Alex Gillespie\n\nIt has bee
 n argued that some hospitals are sometimes resistant to learning from pati
 ent feedback. But few studies have actually analysed defensiveness in prac
 tice. Using concepts of individual and organizational defensiveness\, I an
 alyse 150k online responses of staff to critical feedback on the Care Opin
 ion website. The aim is to identify the linguistic strategies through whic
 h defensiveness operates. \n\nAlongside responses indicative of a learning
  culture\, three potentially problematic transformations are observed: psy
 chologizing (patient reported safety incidents are reconceptualized as ‘
 experiences’ and ‘concerns’)\, individualization (problems are re-fr
 amed as one-off or peculiar)\, and selective focus (picking up on administ
 rative issues while de-emphasizing clinical issues). Although these defens
 ive transformations are carried out by individuals\, they are interpreted 
 in terms of organizational structures which restrict the options for respo
 nders to take ownership over or act on critical feedback. \n\nBeing able t
 o identify defensiveness toward critical patient feedback has implications
 \, not only for identification and intervention\, but also for researchers
  to avoid being complicit in defensiveness.\n\nAbstract: Mary Adams\n\nDra
 wing from sociological and socio-legal studies of patient-doctor dispute\,
  we analyse 41 discursive interviews with healthcare staff drawn from 8 di
 fferent NHS services. We found that patients’ complaints were received m
 ost often by staff as a challenge to fundamental relationships of trust an
 d gratitude. The content of a complaint was often marginalised to the act 
 of complaining. Complaints were most often discussed in relation to local 
 typologies of patient motive – driven by ignorance\, distress or self-in
 terest\; accordingly\, health professionals positioned themselves to recei
 ve patient concerns as informed decision-makers\, empathic listeners or se
 rvice gate-keepers. \n\nWe find differences in our interviewees’ rationa
 lisation of patients’ complaining about care to be related to local serv
 ice contingences rather than to fixed professional differences. We note th
 at it was rare for interviewees to describe complaints raised by patients 
 as grounds for improving the quality of care. \n\nOur findings indicate th
 at recent health policy directives promoting a view of complaints as learn
 ing opportunities from critical patient/consumers must account for sociolo
 gical factors that inform both how the agency of patients is envisaged and
  how professionalism is exercised contemporary healthcare work.\n
LOCATION:Thomas and Dorothy Strangeways Room\, Strangeways Research Labora
 tory\, Wort’s Causeway\, Cambridge\, CB1 8RN
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR