Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Care | Research

Medical Dispute Committees in the Netherlands: a qualitative study of patient expectations and experiences

Authors: Rachel I. Dijkstra, Nieke A. Elbers, Roland D. Friele, Antony Pemberton

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Health care incidents, such as medical errors, cause tragedies all over the world. Recent legislation in the Netherlands has established medical dispute committees to provide for an appeals procedure offering an alternative to civil litigation and to meet the needs of clients. Dispute committees incorporate a hybrid procedure where one can file a complaint and a claim for damages resulting in a verdict without going to court. The procedure is at the crossroads of complaints law and civil litigation. This study seeks to analyze to what extent patients and family members’ expectations and experiences with dispute committees match the goals of the new legislation.

Methods

This qualitative, retrospective research includes in-depth, semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with patients or family members who filed a complaint with a dispute committee in the Netherlands. The researchers conducted an inductive, thematic analysis of the qualitative data.

Results

A total of 26 interviews were held with 30 patients and family members. The results showed that participants particularly felt the need to be heard and to make a positive impact on health care. Some wished to be financially compensated, for others money was the last thing on their mind. The results demonstrated the existence of unequal power relationships between participants and both the defendant and dispute committee members. Participants reported the added value of (legal) support and expressed the need for dialogue at the hearing. Participants sometimes experienced closure after the proceedings, but often did not feel heard or felt a lack of a practical outcome and a tangible improvement.

Conclusions

This study shows that participants’ expectations and experiences were not always met by the current set up of the dispute committee proceedings. Participants did not feel heard, while they did value the potential for monetary compensation. In addition, some participants did not experience an empowered position but rather a feeling of a power misbalance. The feeling of a power misbalance and not being heard might be explained by existing epistemic injustice, which is a concept that should be carefully considered in processes after health care incidents.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference This research uses the term ‘health care incidents’, which is defined as “an event or circumstance during health care which could have, or did, result in unintended or unnecessary harm to a person and/or a complaint, loss or damage”. Runciman W. Shared meanings: preferred terms and definitions for safety and quality concepts. Med J Aust. 2006;184(10):S41. This research uses the term ‘health care incidents’, which is defined as “an event or circumstance during health care which could have, or did, result in unintended or unnecessary harm to a person and/or a complaint, loss or damage”. Runciman W. Shared meanings: preferred terms and definitions for safety and quality concepts. Med J Aust. 2006;184(10):S41.
2.
go back to reference Van der Velden P, Contino C, Akkermans A, Das M. Victims of medical errors and the problems they face: a prospective comparative study among the Dutch population. Eur J Public Health. 2020;30(6):1062–6.CrossRef Van der Velden P, Contino C, Akkermans A, Das M. Victims of medical errors and the problems they face: a prospective comparative study among the Dutch population. Eur J Public Health. 2020;30(6):1062–6.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Dijkstra RI, Roodbeen R, Bouwman R et al. Patients at the centre after a health care incident: A scoping review of hospital strategies targeting communication and nonmaterial restoration. Health Expect. 2022;25(1):264-275. Dijkstra RI, Roodbeen R, Bouwman R et al. Patients at the centre after a health care incident: A scoping review of hospital strategies targeting communication and nonmaterial restoration. Health Expect. 2022;25(1):264-275.
4.
go back to reference Kachalia A, Sands K, Van Niel M, et al. effects of a communication-and-resolution program on hospitals’ malpractice claims and costs. Health Aff. 2018;37(11):1836–44.CrossRef Kachalia A, Sands K, Van Niel M, et al. effects of a communication-and-resolution program on hospitals’ malpractice claims and costs. Health Aff. 2018;37(11):1836–44.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference House of Representatives. Right of Complaint for Clients Health Care Act (‘Wet klachtrecht cliënten zorgsector’ or Wkcz). Parliamentary paper 2009–2010, 32402, 3, 174p. The Netherlands. House of Representatives. Right of Complaint for Clients Health Care Act (‘Wet klachtrecht cliënten zorgsector’ or Wkcz). Parliamentary paper 2009–2010, 32402, 3, 174p. The Netherlands.
6.
go back to reference Upper House. Rules to further the quality of health care and the handling of complaints and disputes in health care (Dutch Quality, Complaints, and Disputes in Health Care Act) – Letter of the Minister of Public Health, Well-Being and Sport. Parliamentary paper 2013–2014, 32402, I, 59p. The Netherlands. Upper House. Rules to further the quality of health care and the handling of complaints and disputes in health care (Dutch Quality, Complaints, and Disputes in Health Care Act) – Letter of the Minister of Public Health, Well-Being and Sport. Parliamentary paper 2013–2014, 32402, I, 59p. The Netherlands.
7.
go back to reference Laarman B, Akkermans A. De afwikkeling van medische schade onder de Wkkgz. Tijdschrift voor Vergoeding Personenschade. 2017;3:57–79.CrossRef Laarman B, Akkermans A. De afwikkeling van medische schade onder de Wkkgz. Tijdschrift voor Vergoeding Personenschade. 2017;3:57–79.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Meruelo N. Mediation and medical malpractice: the need to understand why patients sue and a proposal for a specific model of mediation. J Leg Med. 2008;29(3):285–306.CrossRef Meruelo N. Mediation and medical malpractice: the need to understand why patients sue and a proposal for a specific model of mediation. J Leg Med. 2008;29(3):285–306.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Stamm J, Korzick K, Beech K, Wood K. Medical malpractice: reform for today’s patients and clinicians. Am J Med. 2016;129(1):20–5.CrossRef Stamm J, Korzick K, Beech K, Wood K. Medical malpractice: reform for today’s patients and clinicians. Am J Med. 2016;129(1):20–5.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Laarman B, Van Schoten S, Friele R. Nulmeting: Wet Kwaliteit, Klachten en Geschillen Zorg (Wkkgz). Utrecht: Nivel; 2016. p. 66p. Laarman B, Van Schoten S, Friele R. Nulmeting: Wet Kwaliteit, Klachten en Geschillen Zorg (Wkkgz). Utrecht: Nivel; 2016. p. 66p.
11.
go back to reference Upper House. Rules to further the quality of health care and the handling of complaints and disputes in health care (Dutch Quality, Complaints, and Disputes in Health Care Act). Note in response to report. Parliamentary paper 2014–2015, 32402, O, 21p. The Netherlands. Upper House. Rules to further the quality of health care and the handling of complaints and disputes in health care (Dutch Quality, Complaints, and Disputes in Health Care Act). Note in response to report. Parliamentary paper 2014–2015, 32402, O, 21p. The Netherlands.
12.
go back to reference Bouwman R, Stobbe E, Meijers M, Friele R. Tweede monitor Wkkgz: Stand van zaken patiëntenperspectief en implementatie “Effectieve en laagdrempelige klachten-en geschillenbehandeling.” Utrecht: Nivel; 2019. Bouwman R, Stobbe E, Meijers M, Friele R. Tweede monitor Wkkgz: Stand van zaken patiëntenperspectief en implementatie “Effectieve en laagdrempelige klachten-en geschillenbehandeling.” Utrecht: Nivel; 2019.
13.
go back to reference Bouwman R, Van Gennip IE, Friele R. Monitor Wkkgz: Stand van zaken implementatie “Effectieve en Laagdrempelige Klachten-en Geschillenbehandeling.” Utrecht: Nivel; 2017. Bouwman R, Van Gennip IE, Friele R. Monitor Wkkgz: Stand van zaken implementatie “Effectieve en Laagdrempelige Klachten-en Geschillenbehandeling.” Utrecht: Nivel; 2017.
14.
go back to reference Friele R, Legemaate J, Wijne R, et al. Evaluatie Wet kwaliteit, klachten en geschillen zorg. Den Haag: ZonMw; 2021. Friele R, Legemaate J, Wijne R, et al. Evaluatie Wet kwaliteit, klachten en geschillen zorg. Den Haag: ZonMw; 2021.
15.
go back to reference Reglement Geschillencommissie Zorg Algemeen 2017 (Netherlands) Reglement Geschillencommissie Zorg Algemeen 2017 (Netherlands)
16.
go back to reference Reglement Geschilleninstantie Mondzorg 2017 (Netherlands) Reglement Geschilleninstantie Mondzorg 2017 (Netherlands)
17.
go back to reference Reglement Geschillencommissie Huisartsen 2016 (Netherlands) Reglement Geschillencommissie Huisartsen 2016 (Netherlands)
18.
go back to reference Boeije H, Bleijenbergh I. Analyseren in kwalitatief onderzoek. 3rd ed. Amsterdam: Boom uitgevers; 2019. Boeije H, Bleijenbergh I. Analyseren in kwalitatief onderzoek. 3rd ed. Amsterdam: Boom uitgevers; 2019.
19.
go back to reference Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101.CrossRef Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Braun V, Clarke V, et al. Thematic Analysis. In: Cooper H, et al., editors. APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. USA: American Psychological Association; 2012. p. 57–71. Braun V, Clarke V, et al. Thematic Analysis. In: Cooper H, et al., editors. APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. USA: American Psychological Association; 2012. p. 57–71.
21.
go back to reference Fondacaro M, Frogner B, Moos R. Justice in health care decision-making: patients’ appraisals of health care providers and health plan representatives. Soc Justice Res. 2005;18(1):63–81.CrossRef Fondacaro M, Frogner B, Moos R. Justice in health care decision-making: patients’ appraisals of health care providers and health plan representatives. Soc Justice Res. 2005;18(1):63–81.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Relis T. It’s not about the money: a theory of misconceptions of plaintiffs’ litigation aims. Univ Pittsbg Law Rev. 2006;68:701–46. Relis T. It’s not about the money: a theory of misconceptions of plaintiffs’ litigation aims. Univ Pittsbg Law Rev. 2006;68:701–46.
23.
go back to reference Tingle J. Poor communication and an opaque complaints process. Br J Nurs. 2018;27(22):1338–9.CrossRef Tingle J. Poor communication and an opaque complaints process. Br J Nurs. 2018;27(22):1338–9.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Bismark M, Spittal M, Gogos A, et al. Remedies sought and obtained in healthcare complaints. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20:806–10.CrossRef Bismark M, Spittal M, Gogos A, et al. Remedies sought and obtained in healthcare complaints. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20:806–10.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Iedema R, Allen S, Britton K, et al. Patients’ and family members’ views on how clinicians enact and how they should enact incident disclosure: the “100 patient stories” qualitative study. BMJ. 2011;343:d4423.CrossRef Iedema R, Allen S, Britton K, et al. Patients’ and family members’ views on how clinicians enact and how they should enact incident disclosure: the “100 patient stories” qualitative study. BMJ. 2011;343:d4423.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Moore J, Mello M. Improving reconciliation following medical injury: a qualitative study of responses to patient safety incidents in New Zealand. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017;26(10):788–98.CrossRef Moore J, Mello M. Improving reconciliation following medical injury: a qualitative study of responses to patient safety incidents in New Zealand. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017;26(10):788–98.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Moore J, Bismark M, Mello M. Patients’ experiences with communication-and-resolution programs after medical injury. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(11):1595–603.CrossRef Moore J, Bismark M, Mello M. Patients’ experiences with communication-and-resolution programs after medical injury. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(11):1595–603.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Morecroft C, Cantrill J, Tully MP. Can in-depth research interviews have a ‘therapeutic’ effect for participants? Int J Pharm Pract. 2004;12:247–54.CrossRef Morecroft C, Cantrill J, Tully MP. Can in-depth research interviews have a ‘therapeutic’ effect for participants? Int J Pharm Pract. 2004;12:247–54.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Friele R, Sluijs E. Patient expectations of fair complaint handling in hospitals: empirical data. BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;6(1):106–14.CrossRef Friele R, Sluijs E. Patient expectations of fair complaint handling in hospitals: empirical data. BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;6(1):106–14.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Van Wees K, Akkermans A, Huver R, Elbers N. Meer dan geld alleen. Resultaten van een onderzoek naar behoeften, verwachtingen en ervaringen van slachtoffers en hun naasten met betrekking tot het civiele aansprakelijkheidsrecht. Ars Aequi. 2007;56(11):852–61. Van Wees K, Akkermans A, Huver R, Elbers N. Meer dan geld alleen. Resultaten van een onderzoek naar behoeften, verwachtingen en ervaringen van slachtoffers en hun naasten met betrekking tot het civiele aansprakelijkheidsrecht. Ars Aequi. 2007;56(11):852–61.
31.
go back to reference Fricker M. Epistemic injustice: power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.CrossRef Fricker M. Epistemic injustice: power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Kidd I, Carel H. Epistemic injustice and illness. J Appl Philos. 2017;34(2):172–90.CrossRef Kidd I, Carel H. Epistemic injustice and illness. J Appl Philos. 2017;34(2):172–90.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Carel H, Kidd I. Epistemic injustice in healthcare: a philosophical analysis. Med Health Care Philos. 2014;17(4):529–40.CrossRef Carel H, Kidd I. Epistemic injustice in healthcare: a philosophical analysis. Med Health Care Philos. 2014;17(4):529–40.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference De Kam D. Through the Regulator’s Eyes: On the effects of making quality and safety of care inspectable [Dissertation]. Rotterdam: Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management; 2020. De Kam D. Through the Regulator’s Eyes: On the effects of making quality and safety of care inspectable [Dissertation]. Rotterdam: Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management; 2020.
35.
go back to reference Morris J, Moore J, Bismark M. Health complaints entities in Australia and New Zealand: serving the public interest? In: Chamberlain JM, Dent M, Saks M, editors. Professional health regulation in the public interest. International perspectives. Great Britain: Policy Press; 2018. p. 221. Morris J, Moore J, Bismark M. Health complaints entities in Australia and New Zealand: serving the public interest? In: Chamberlain JM, Dent M, Saks M, editors. Professional health regulation in the public interest. International perspectives. Great Britain: Policy Press; 2018. p. 221.
Metadata
Title
Medical Dispute Committees in the Netherlands: a qualitative study of patient expectations and experiences
Authors
Rachel I. Dijkstra
Nieke A. Elbers
Roland D. Friele
Antony Pemberton
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Care
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08021-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

BMC Health Services Research 1/2022 Go to the issue