‘Virtually daily grief’—understanding distress in health practitioners involved in a regulatory complaints process: a qualitative study in Australia

Abstract Protection of the public is the paramount aim for health practitioner regulation, yet there has been growing concern globally on the association between regulatory complaints processes and practitioner mental health and wellbeing. The objective was to understand the experience, particularly...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal for quality in health care 2023-10, Vol.35 (4)
Hauptverfasser: Biggar, Susan, van der Gaag, Anna, Maher, Pat, Evans, Jacinta, Bondu, Lakshmi, Kar Ray, Manaan, Phillips, Rachel, Tonkin, Anne, Schofield, Catherine, Ayscough, Kym, Hardy, Matthew, Anderson, Sarah, Saar, Eva, Fletcher, Martin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 4
container_start_page
container_title International journal for quality in health care
container_volume 35
creator Biggar, Susan
van der Gaag, Anna
Maher, Pat
Evans, Jacinta
Bondu, Lakshmi
Kar Ray, Manaan
Phillips, Rachel
Tonkin, Anne
Schofield, Catherine
Ayscough, Kym
Hardy, Matthew
Anderson, Sarah
Saar, Eva
Fletcher, Martin
description Abstract Protection of the public is the paramount aim for health practitioner regulation, yet there has been growing concern globally on the association between regulatory complaints processes and practitioner mental health and wellbeing. The objective was to understand the experience, particularly distress, of health practitioners involved in a regulatory complaints process to identify potential strategies to minimise future risk of distress. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with health practitioners in Australia who had recently been through a regulatory complaints process, together with a retrospective analysis of documentation relating to all identified cases of self-harm or suicide of health practitioners who were involved in such a process over 4 years. Data from interviews and the serious incident analysis found there were elements of the regulatory complaints process contributing to practitioner distress. These included poor communication, extended time to close the investigation, and the management of health-related concerns. The study found external personal circumstances and pre-existing conditions could put the practitioner at greater risk of distress. There were found to be key moments in the process—triggers—where the practitioner was at particular risk of severe distress. Strong support networks, both personal and professional, were found to be protective against distress. Through process improvements and, where appropriate, additional support for practitioners, we hope to further minimise the risk of practitioner distress and harm when involved in a regulatory complaints process. The findings also point to the need for improved partnerships between regulators and key stakeholders, such as legal defence organisations, indemnity providers, employers, and those with lived experience of complaints processes. Together they can improve the support for practitioners facing a complaint and address the stigma, shame, and fear associated with regulatory complaints processes. This project provides further evidence that a more compassionate approach to regulation has the potential to be better for all parties and, ultimately, the wider healthcare system.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/intqhc/mzad076
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10588820</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/intqhc/mzad076</oup_id><sourcerecordid>2869612026</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c402t-ee180eccaf00030897468c367df2e2a029131a9c79a826deb08b57416ef22453</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUc1u1DAQjhCIlsKVc45wSOufxHG4oKqigFSJS8XVmrUnu0ZOnLWdlbanfQgOcKjEs_Ao-yS43RUSJy7jkb6_kb-ieE3JOSUdv7BjWq_0xXAHhrTiSXFKa1FXXLTt07zzhld1Q5qT4kWM3wihgjfieXHC27ahXIrT4n6_-_HVhjSDc9vSgM1zGSz2-93P_e77PBoMMcFo7LgsjY0pYIylHX__WiG4tCqnADrZZP2YiRnYeLdB88iAMuBydpB82JbaD5ODfG7MEq-zy7sSynXOtQmS3WAZ02y2j8LLOedkAF4Wz3pwEV8d37Pi9vrD7dWn6ubLx89XlzeVrglLFSKVBLWGnhDCiezaWkidP8H0DBkQ1lFOodNtB5IJgwsiF01bU4E9Y3XDz4r3B9tpXgxoNI4P8WoKdoCwVR6s-hcZ7Uot_UZR0kgpGckOb44Owa9njEkNNmp0Dkb0c1RMik5QRpjI1PMDVQcfY8D-bw4l6qFTdehUHTvNgrcHgZ-n_3H_ADOUr6I</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2869612026</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>‘Virtually daily grief’—understanding distress in health practitioners involved in a regulatory complaints process: a qualitative study in Australia</title><source>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Biggar, Susan ; van der Gaag, Anna ; Maher, Pat ; Evans, Jacinta ; Bondu, Lakshmi ; Kar Ray, Manaan ; Phillips, Rachel ; Tonkin, Anne ; Schofield, Catherine ; Ayscough, Kym ; Hardy, Matthew ; Anderson, Sarah ; Saar, Eva ; Fletcher, Martin</creator><creatorcontrib>Biggar, Susan ; van der Gaag, Anna ; Maher, Pat ; Evans, Jacinta ; Bondu, Lakshmi ; Kar Ray, Manaan ; Phillips, Rachel ; Tonkin, Anne ; Schofield, Catherine ; Ayscough, Kym ; Hardy, Matthew ; Anderson, Sarah ; Saar, Eva ; Fletcher, Martin</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Protection of the public is the paramount aim for health practitioner regulation, yet there has been growing concern globally on the association between regulatory complaints processes and practitioner mental health and wellbeing. The objective was to understand the experience, particularly distress, of health practitioners involved in a regulatory complaints process to identify potential strategies to minimise future risk of distress. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with health practitioners in Australia who had recently been through a regulatory complaints process, together with a retrospective analysis of documentation relating to all identified cases of self-harm or suicide of health practitioners who were involved in such a process over 4 years. Data from interviews and the serious incident analysis found there were elements of the regulatory complaints process contributing to practitioner distress. These included poor communication, extended time to close the investigation, and the management of health-related concerns. The study found external personal circumstances and pre-existing conditions could put the practitioner at greater risk of distress. There were found to be key moments in the process—triggers—where the practitioner was at particular risk of severe distress. Strong support networks, both personal and professional, were found to be protective against distress. Through process improvements and, where appropriate, additional support for practitioners, we hope to further minimise the risk of practitioner distress and harm when involved in a regulatory complaints process. The findings also point to the need for improved partnerships between regulators and key stakeholders, such as legal defence organisations, indemnity providers, employers, and those with lived experience of complaints processes. Together they can improve the support for practitioners facing a complaint and address the stigma, shame, and fear associated with regulatory complaints processes. This project provides further evidence that a more compassionate approach to regulation has the potential to be better for all parties and, ultimately, the wider healthcare system.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1353-4505</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1464-3677</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzad076</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37751386</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>UK: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Original</subject><ispartof>International journal for quality in health care, 2023-10, Vol.35 (4)</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Quality in Health Care. 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c402t-ee180eccaf00030897468c367df2e2a029131a9c79a826deb08b57416ef22453</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c402t-ee180eccaf00030897468c367df2e2a029131a9c79a826deb08b57416ef22453</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5460-6169</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,1578,1598,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Biggar, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Gaag, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maher, Pat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Evans, Jacinta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bondu, Lakshmi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kar Ray, Manaan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, Rachel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tonkin, Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schofield, Catherine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ayscough, Kym</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hardy, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saar, Eva</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fletcher, Martin</creatorcontrib><title>‘Virtually daily grief’—understanding distress in health practitioners involved in a regulatory complaints process: a qualitative study in Australia</title><title>International journal for quality in health care</title><description>Abstract Protection of the public is the paramount aim for health practitioner regulation, yet there has been growing concern globally on the association between regulatory complaints processes and practitioner mental health and wellbeing. The objective was to understand the experience, particularly distress, of health practitioners involved in a regulatory complaints process to identify potential strategies to minimise future risk of distress. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with health practitioners in Australia who had recently been through a regulatory complaints process, together with a retrospective analysis of documentation relating to all identified cases of self-harm or suicide of health practitioners who were involved in such a process over 4 years. Data from interviews and the serious incident analysis found there were elements of the regulatory complaints process contributing to practitioner distress. These included poor communication, extended time to close the investigation, and the management of health-related concerns. The study found external personal circumstances and pre-existing conditions could put the practitioner at greater risk of distress. There were found to be key moments in the process—triggers—where the practitioner was at particular risk of severe distress. Strong support networks, both personal and professional, were found to be protective against distress. Through process improvements and, where appropriate, additional support for practitioners, we hope to further minimise the risk of practitioner distress and harm when involved in a regulatory complaints process. The findings also point to the need for improved partnerships between regulators and key stakeholders, such as legal defence organisations, indemnity providers, employers, and those with lived experience of complaints processes. Together they can improve the support for practitioners facing a complaint and address the stigma, shame, and fear associated with regulatory complaints processes. This project provides further evidence that a more compassionate approach to regulation has the potential to be better for all parties and, ultimately, the wider healthcare system.</description><subject>Original</subject><issn>1353-4505</issn><issn>1464-3677</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>TOX</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUc1u1DAQjhCIlsKVc45wSOufxHG4oKqigFSJS8XVmrUnu0ZOnLWdlbanfQgOcKjEs_Ao-yS43RUSJy7jkb6_kb-ieE3JOSUdv7BjWq_0xXAHhrTiSXFKa1FXXLTt07zzhld1Q5qT4kWM3wihgjfieXHC27ahXIrT4n6_-_HVhjSDc9vSgM1zGSz2-93P_e77PBoMMcFo7LgsjY0pYIylHX__WiG4tCqnADrZZP2YiRnYeLdB88iAMuBydpB82JbaD5ODfG7MEq-zy7sSynXOtQmS3WAZ02y2j8LLOedkAF4Wz3pwEV8d37Pi9vrD7dWn6ubLx89XlzeVrglLFSKVBLWGnhDCiezaWkidP8H0DBkQ1lFOodNtB5IJgwsiF01bU4E9Y3XDz4r3B9tpXgxoNI4P8WoKdoCwVR6s-hcZ7Uot_UZR0kgpGckOb44Owa9njEkNNmp0Dkb0c1RMik5QRpjI1PMDVQcfY8D-bw4l6qFTdehUHTvNgrcHgZ-n_3H_ADOUr6I</recordid><startdate>20231020</startdate><enddate>20231020</enddate><creator>Biggar, Susan</creator><creator>van der Gaag, Anna</creator><creator>Maher, Pat</creator><creator>Evans, Jacinta</creator><creator>Bondu, Lakshmi</creator><creator>Kar Ray, Manaan</creator><creator>Phillips, Rachel</creator><creator>Tonkin, Anne</creator><creator>Schofield, Catherine</creator><creator>Ayscough, Kym</creator><creator>Hardy, Matthew</creator><creator>Anderson, Sarah</creator><creator>Saar, Eva</creator><creator>Fletcher, Martin</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>TOX</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5460-6169</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231020</creationdate><title>‘Virtually daily grief’—understanding distress in health practitioners involved in a regulatory complaints process: a qualitative study in Australia</title><author>Biggar, Susan ; van der Gaag, Anna ; Maher, Pat ; Evans, Jacinta ; Bondu, Lakshmi ; Kar Ray, Manaan ; Phillips, Rachel ; Tonkin, Anne ; Schofield, Catherine ; Ayscough, Kym ; Hardy, Matthew ; Anderson, Sarah ; Saar, Eva ; Fletcher, Martin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c402t-ee180eccaf00030897468c367df2e2a029131a9c79a826deb08b57416ef22453</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Original</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Biggar, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Gaag, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maher, Pat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Evans, Jacinta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bondu, Lakshmi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kar Ray, Manaan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, Rachel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tonkin, Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schofield, Catherine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ayscough, Kym</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hardy, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saar, Eva</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fletcher, Martin</creatorcontrib><collection>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>International journal for quality in health care</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Biggar, Susan</au><au>van der Gaag, Anna</au><au>Maher, Pat</au><au>Evans, Jacinta</au><au>Bondu, Lakshmi</au><au>Kar Ray, Manaan</au><au>Phillips, Rachel</au><au>Tonkin, Anne</au><au>Schofield, Catherine</au><au>Ayscough, Kym</au><au>Hardy, Matthew</au><au>Anderson, Sarah</au><au>Saar, Eva</au><au>Fletcher, Martin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>‘Virtually daily grief’—understanding distress in health practitioners involved in a regulatory complaints process: a qualitative study in Australia</atitle><jtitle>International journal for quality in health care</jtitle><date>2023-10-20</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>4</issue><issn>1353-4505</issn><eissn>1464-3677</eissn><abstract>Abstract Protection of the public is the paramount aim for health practitioner regulation, yet there has been growing concern globally on the association between regulatory complaints processes and practitioner mental health and wellbeing. The objective was to understand the experience, particularly distress, of health practitioners involved in a regulatory complaints process to identify potential strategies to minimise future risk of distress. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with health practitioners in Australia who had recently been through a regulatory complaints process, together with a retrospective analysis of documentation relating to all identified cases of self-harm or suicide of health practitioners who were involved in such a process over 4 years. Data from interviews and the serious incident analysis found there were elements of the regulatory complaints process contributing to practitioner distress. These included poor communication, extended time to close the investigation, and the management of health-related concerns. The study found external personal circumstances and pre-existing conditions could put the practitioner at greater risk of distress. There were found to be key moments in the process—triggers—where the practitioner was at particular risk of severe distress. Strong support networks, both personal and professional, were found to be protective against distress. Through process improvements and, where appropriate, additional support for practitioners, we hope to further minimise the risk of practitioner distress and harm when involved in a regulatory complaints process. The findings also point to the need for improved partnerships between regulators and key stakeholders, such as legal defence organisations, indemnity providers, employers, and those with lived experience of complaints processes. Together they can improve the support for practitioners facing a complaint and address the stigma, shame, and fear associated with regulatory complaints processes. This project provides further evidence that a more compassionate approach to regulation has the potential to be better for all parties and, ultimately, the wider healthcare system.</abstract><cop>UK</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>37751386</pmid><doi>10.1093/intqhc/mzad076</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5460-6169</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1353-4505
ispartof International journal for quality in health care, 2023-10, Vol.35 (4)
issn 1353-4505
1464-3677
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10588820
source Oxford Journals Open Access Collection; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Original
title ‘Virtually daily grief’—understanding distress in health practitioners involved in a regulatory complaints process: a qualitative study in Australia
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-12T21%3A57%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=%E2%80%98Virtually%20daily%20grief%E2%80%99%E2%80%94understanding%20distress%20in%C2%A0health%20practitioners%20involved%20in%C2%A0a%20regulatory%20complaints%20process:%20a%20qualitative%20study%20in%C2%A0Australia&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20for%20quality%20in%20health%20care&rft.au=Biggar,%20Susan&rft.date=2023-10-20&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=4&rft.issn=1353-4505&rft.eissn=1464-3677&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/intqhc/mzad076&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2869612026%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2869612026&rft_id=info:pmid/37751386&rft_oup_id=10.1093/intqhc/mzad076&rfr_iscdi=true