NOTICE BOARD
Complaints from grieving relatives COMPLAINTS are an everyday fact of life and at MDDUS
we assist thousands of members from all areas of practice with advice about the most appropriate way to move forward. Complaints from grieving relatives can be among the most difficult to respond to. These may involve individuals who you have not encountered before, challenging the care and treatment of their loved one and making allegations about your standards of practice. Not having an existing relationship with the complainant can compound difficulties in an already emotionally charged situation. Poor handling of such complaints is likely to lead to protracted
correspondence, failure to resolve the issues, escalation of the complaint and missed opportunities to improve practice. Responses require sensitivity and tact, thorough investigation and clarity in replying. Many practitioners can feel very defensive when dealing with such cases and their own emotional response can interfere with their engagement in the process. In some cases, respecting the confidentiality of the patient can also be a barrier and this aspect needs careful handling. When formulating a response there are some basic steps to consider. The opening must be polite and conciliatory. Put yourself in the position of someone who is grieving and has concerns about a loved one’s care. What reply would you expect to receive? The first paragraph will probably have the greatest influence on the reader. The complainant may have had no prior knowledge of the practice or the doctors being complained about – their main impression may be determined simply by the tone of the reply letter. In regard to content, it is essential to identify all the issues the complainant wishes to have addressed. If in doubt, list the issues you have identified from the complaint and then detail the steps taken to investigate these issues: for example, a review of medical records, discussions with staff, the obtaining of reports, etc. These should be clearly described. All of the issues identified in the complaint must be addressed. If a numbering system has been used in the initial identification of concerns, it is helpful to use the same numbering system for the response. This aids clarity and avoids errors in omitting to comment on pertinent matters. Increasingly, significant event review (SER) forms part of an initial investigation and there are many templates available online which are clear and straightforward to follow. Be aware of the emotions of the complainant throughout your
response, including the potential impact of terms and expressions used. It is best to write in full and proper English;
decision making in their fitness to practise process. The challenge now is to turn aspiration into early action in order for the plan to be credible and effective.” MDDUS has seen a significant increase
● RAISING SAFETY CONCERNS Explore the issues around raising concerns over patient safety in this new video module. Senior risk adviser Liz Price examines the duties set out by the GMC and GDC, and reviews commonly raised
SPRING 2016
avoid using “medical speak”. Some of the draft responses we see at MDDUS can be too
defensive: for example, they focus on statistics which show how good the practice is, or counter negative comments about members of staff by stating that no one else has ever complained. Complainants who are already upset at having lost a relative or friend may become even more distraught if a response does not deal with the issues raised. Any reply which appears to avoid answering difficult questions will only inflame matters further. Responses should always include an offer to meet with
relevant practice staff – or to discuss alternatives to a meeting if this is not practical because a complainant lives in another part of the country. All responses should also inform the complainant of their right to raise concerns with the ombudsman (along with contact details) if they are dissatisfied with the practice response. Time and effort spent on an initial reply is more likely to resolve a complaint. A hasty or incomplete investigation – revealing a lack of proper attention to detail – may compromise early resolution and increase the likelihood of extensive corrective recommendations from the ombudsman and risk escalation of the complaint to the GMC. It is noteworthy that a significant number of GMC cases arise where there have been communication difficulties between doctors and grieving relatives. Members should seek MDDUS advice where a complaint requires significant investigation.
Dr Gail Gilmartin is a senior medical and risk adviser at MDDUS
in the number of members subject to investigation by the GDC in recent years (up 37 per cent in 2014), the vast majority of which lead to no action. “The often unjustified threat of
issues. She goes on to explore why raising concerns is still so difficult despite all of the protections in place. Members can access the film in the eLearning centre in the Risk Management section at
www.mddus.com.
regulatory action can destroy careers and reputations. We support steps that will make the process less stressful for dentists and reduce the number resulting in a final hearing,” says Kenny.
● BMJ AWARDS SHORTLIST The shortlist has been published for the 2016 BMJ Awards, held in association with MDDUS. There are 14 categories recognising excellence and innovation in patient care delivered by teams
across the UK, with MDDUS sponsoring the Primary Care Team award. Winners will be announced at a ceremony on May 5 in London. Read the full list of nominees in each category at
tinyurl.com/ hld8llg
5
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24