BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//talks.cam.ac.uk//v3//EN
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/London
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:BST
DTSTART:19700329T010000
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=3;BYDAY=-1SU
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:GMT
DTSTART:19701025T020000
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=10;BYDAY=-1SU
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
CATEGORIES:Primary Care
SUMMARY:CANCELLED: How perspectives from social sciences c
 an help address practical questions of healthcare 
 improvement - Dr Alex Gillespie\, Department of Ps
 ychological and Behavioural Science\, London Schoo
 l of Economics\, and Dr Mary Adams\, Senior Resear
 ch Fellow\, King’s College London
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20200324T140000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20200324T160000
UID:TALK139375AThttp://talks.cam.ac.uk
URL:http://talks.cam.ac.uk/talk/index/139375
DESCRIPTION:*Please "register here":https://www.eventbrite.co.
 uk/e/exploring-healthcare-staff-responses-to-patie
 nt-complaints-tickets-61778615502 for this event: 
 seats are limited*\n\nAbstract: Alex Gillespie\n\n
 It has been argued that some hospitals are sometim
 es resistant to learning from patient feedback. Bu
 t few studies have actually analysed defensiveness
  in practice. Using concepts of individual and org
 anizational defensiveness\, I analyse 150k online 
 responses of staff to critical feedback on the Car
 e Opinion website. The aim is to identify the ling
 uistic strategies through which defensiveness oper
 ates. \n\nAlongside responses indicative of a lear
 ning culture\, three potentially problematic trans
 formations are observed: psychologizing (patient r
 eported safety incidents are reconceptualized as ‘
 experiences’ and ‘concerns’)\, individualization (
 problems are re-framed as one-off or peculiar)\, a
 nd selective focus (picking up on administrative i
 ssues while de-emphasizing clinical issues). Altho
 ugh these defensive transformations are carried ou
 t by individuals\, they are interpreted in terms o
 f organizational structures which restrict the opt
 ions for responders to take ownership over or act 
 on critical feedback. \n\nBeing able to identify d
 efensiveness toward critical patient feedback has 
 implications\, not only for identification and int
 ervention\, but also for researchers to avoid bein
 g complicit in defensiveness.\n\nAbstract: Mary Ad
 ams\n\nDrawing from sociological and socio-legal s
 tudies of patient-doctor dispute\, we analyse 41 d
 iscursive interviews with healthcare staff drawn f
 rom 8 different NHS services. We found that patien
 ts’ complaints were received most often by staff a
 s a challenge to fundamental relationships of trus
 t and gratitude. The content of a complaint was of
 ten marginalised to the act of complaining. Compla
 ints were most often discussed in relation to loca
 l typologies of patient motive – driven by ignoran
 ce\, distress or self-interest\; accordingly\, hea
 lth professionals positioned themselves to receive
  patient concerns as informed decision-makers\, em
 pathic listeners or service gate-keepers. \n\nWe f
 ind differences in our interviewees’ rationalisati
 on of patients’ complaining about care to be relat
 ed to local service contingences rather than to fi
 xed professional differences. We note that it was 
 rare for interviewees to describe complaints raise
 d by patients as grounds for improving the quality
  of care. \n\nOur findings indicate that recent he
 alth policy directives promoting a view of complai
 nts as learning opportunities from critical patien
 t/consumers must account for sociological factors 
 that inform both how the agency of patients is env
 isaged and how professionalism is exercised contem
 porary healthcare work.\n
LOCATION:Thomas and Dorothy Strangeways Room\, Strangeways 
 Research Laboratory\, Wort’s Causeway\, Cambridge\
 , CB1 8RN
CONTACT:Lucy Lloyd
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR