Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nationalestraat 155, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium.
Department of Health Ethics and Society, Maastricht University, 6200MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Health Policy Plan. 2021 Oct 12;36(9):1470-1482. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czab066.
The notion of patient rights encompasses the obligations of the state and healthcare providers to respect the dignity, autonomy and equality of care-seeking individuals in healthcare processes. Functional patient grievance redressal systems are key to ensuring that the rights of individuals seeking healthcare are protected. We critically examined the published literature from high-income and upper-middle-income countries to establish an analytical framework on grievance redressal for patient rights violations in health facilities. We then used lawsuits on patient rights violations from the Supreme Court of India to analyse the relevance of the developed framework to the Indian context. With market perspectives pervading the health sector, there is an increasing trend of adopting a consumerist approach to protecting patient rights. In this line, avenues for grievance redressal for patient rights violations are gaining traction. Some of the methods and instruments for patient rights implementation include charters, ombudsmen, tribunals, health professional councils, separating rules for redressal and professional liability in patient rights violations, blame-free reporting systems, direct community monitoring and the court system. The grievance redressal mechanisms for patient rights violations in health facilities showcase multilevel governance arrangements with overlapping decision-making units at the national and subnational levels. The privileged position of medical professionals in multilevel governance arrangements for grievance redressal puts care-seeking individuals at a disadvantaged position during dispute resolution processes. Inclusion of external structures in health services and the healthcare profession and laypersons in the grievance redressal processes is heavily contested. Normatively speaking, a patient grievance redressal system should be accessible, impartial and independent in its function, possess the required competence, have adequate authority, seek continuous quality improvement, offer feedback to the health system and be comprehensive and integrated within the larger healthcare regulatory architecture.
患者权利的概念包含国家和医疗保健提供者的义务,即尊重医疗保健过程中寻求医疗保健的个人的尊严、自主性和平等。功能健全的患者申诉补救系统是确保寻求医疗保健的个人权利得到保护的关键。我们批判性地审查了高收入和中上收入国家的已发表文献,以建立一个关于卫生保健机构中侵犯患者权利的申诉补救的分析框架。然后,我们利用印度最高法院关于侵犯患者权利的诉讼来分析所制定框架对印度背景的相关性。随着市场观点在卫生部门中盛行,采用消费者保护方法来保护患者权利的趋势日益明显。在这种情况下,侵犯患者权利的申诉补救途径越来越受到关注。一些侵犯患者权利实施的方法和工具包括章程、监察员、法庭、医疗专业人员理事会、针对侵犯患者权利的补救措施和专业责任的单独规则、无责报告制度、直接社区监督和法院系统。卫生保健机构中侵犯患者权利的申诉补救机制展示了多层次治理安排,在国家和国家以下各级都有重叠的决策单位。在多层次治理安排中,医疗专业人员在申诉补救方面的特权地位使寻求医疗保健的个人在争议解决过程中处于不利地位。在申诉补救过程中,将外部结构和医疗服务及医疗保健专业中的外行纳入其中受到了强烈质疑。从规范上讲,患者申诉补救系统应该具有可及性、公正性和独立性,具备所需的能力、充分的权威、寻求持续质量改进、向卫生系统提供反馈,并且在更广泛的医疗保健监管架构中具有全面性和综合性。