Patient-reported harm from NHS treatment or care, or the lack of access to care: a cross-sectional survey of general population prevalence, impact and responses

We found that 9.7% of the British general population reported harm by the NHS, a higher rate than reported in two previous surveys. Our study used a broader and more inclusive definition of harm and was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, making comparison to previous surveys challenging. People responded to harm in different ways, such as sharing experiences with others and seeking professional advice and support. Mostly, people who were harmed wanted help to redress the harm or to gain access to the care needed. Low satisfaction with PALS and complaints services may reflect that these services do not always deliver the required support. There is a need to better understand the patient perspective following harm and for further consideration of what a person-centred approach to resolution and recovery might look like.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMJ Quality & Safety
Published
2025-04-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2024-017213
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
10.11
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Patient-reported harm from NHS treatment or care, or the lack of access to care: a cross-sectional survey of general population prevalence, impact and responses

Ray Fitzpatrick, Charles A. Vincent, Michele Peters, Helen Hogan et al.
5 citations
BMJ Quality & Safety
Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues
10.11
article

Patient-reported harm from NHS treatment or care, or the lack of access to care: a cross-sectional survey of general population prevalence, impact and responses

Ray Fitzpatrick, Charles A. Vincent, Michele Peters, Helen Hogan, Lavanya Thana, David Cromwell, Alastair Gray, Chris Graham, Helen Crocker, Shivali Modha
article en
5 citations

Abstract

We found that 9.7% of the British general population reported harm by the NHS, a higher rate than reported in two previous surveys. Our study used a broader and more inclusive definition of harm and was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, making comparison to previous surveys challenging. People responded to harm in different ways, such as sharing experiences with others and seeking professional advice and support. Mostly, people who were harmed wanted help to redress the harm or to gain access to the care needed. Low satisfaction with PALS and complaints services may reflect that these services do not always deliver the required support. There is a need to better understand the patient perspective following harm and for further consideration of what a person-centred approach to resolution and recovery might look like.

BMJ Quality & SafetyVol. 35(1)
Picker Institute Europe (GB), University of Oxford (GB), London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues
10.11
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.