Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2019 Oct;29(10):5395-5402.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06158-z. Epub 2019 Mar 22.

Patient complaints in radiology: 9-year experience at a European tertiary care center

Affiliations
Observational Study

Patient complaints in radiology: 9-year experience at a European tertiary care center

Pieter F van den Berg et al. Eur Radiol. 2019 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: To determine the frequency, nature (using standardized coding taxonomy), and temporal trends of patient complaints about the radiological service provided in a European tertiary care center.

Methods: This retrospective study included all written patient complaints received by the department of radiology of a European tertiary care center within a 9-year period.

Results: A total of 94 written patient complaints were included. Overall complaint frequency was 14.4 per 100,000 radiological procedures. Complaint frequencies per 100,000 procedures were 103.7 for interventional radiology, 13.9 for MRI, 6.9 for ultrasonography, 6.5 for CT, 4.5 for fluoroscopy, and 1.2 for conventional radiography. Interventional radiology received significantly more complaints than all other radiological procedures (p < 0.001), and cross-sectional imaging (CT, MRI, and ultrasonography) received significantly more complaints than conventional radiography (p < 0.001). Fifty-three (56.4%) complaints belonged to the clinical domain, 22 (23.4%) to the relationships domain, and 19 (20.2%) to the management domain. Quality (34.0%), safety (22.3%), timing and access (18.1%), and communication (18.1%) constituted almost all complaint categories. Patient journey (19.1%), delays (18.1%), communication breakdown (16.0%), errors in diagnosis (11.7%), quality of care (9.6%), treatment (6.4%), and staff attitudes (2.1%) constituted almost all complaint subcategories. Annual frequency of complaints decreased over time (Mann-Kendall tau = - 0.429), although not significantly (p = 0.174).

Conclusion: Written patient complaints directed to a department of radiology at a European tertiary care center are relatively few in number and have not shown a temporal increase. Knowledge of sources of patient dissatisfaction may help to reduce the number of patient complaints and improve patient care.

Key points: • Approximately 14.4 written patient complaints per 100,000 radiological procedures are filed in a European tertiary care center, and they have not increased over a 9-year period. • Written patient complaints most frequently involve interventional radiology, and the main complaint categories are quality (34.0%), safety (22.3%), timing and access (18.1%), and communication (18.1%). • Knowledge of the nature of and circumstances under which patient complaints arise may reduce their number and improve patient care.

Keywords: Hospital-patient relations; Patient satisfaction; Patient-centered care; Radiology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Number of complaints per 100,000 procedures performed (between 2010 and 2017), for interventional radiology, MRI, ultrasonography, CT, fluoroscopy, and conventional radiography separately
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Distribution of complaints among the different domains, categories, and subcategories according to the patient complaint taxonomy by Reader et al [7]
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Number of complaints per 100,000 radiological procedures per year (gray line) with non-parametric LOESS fit in blue (Mann-Kendall tau of − 0.429; p = 0.174)

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Sitzia J, Wood N. Patient satisfaction: a review of issues and concepts. Soc Sci Med. 1997;45:1829–1843. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(97)00128-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Itri JN. Patient-centered radiology. Radiographics. 2015;35:1835–1846. doi: 10.1148/rg.2015150110. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Salazar G, Quencer K, Aran S, Abujudeh H. Patient satisfaction in radiology: qualitative analysis of written complaints generated over a 10-year period in an academic medical center. J Am Coll Radiol. 2013;10:513–517. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2013.03.013. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Xesfingi S, Vozikis A. Patient satisfaction with the healthcare system: assessing the impact of socio-economic and healthcare provision factors. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16:94. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1327-4. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Smith-Bindman R, Miglioretti DL, Johnson E, et al. Use of diagnostic imaging studies and associated radiation exposure for patients enrolled in large integrated health care systems, 1996-2010. JAMA. 2012;307(22):2400–2409. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.5960. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources