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

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.

Beyond symptom resolution: insurance case manager's perspective on predicting recovery after motor vehicle crash.

PURPOSE: Insurance company case managers can play a critical role in the rehabilitation process of people with musculoskeletal disorders sustained following minor motor vehicle crash injury due to their interaction with multiple stakeholders and their role in approving various services. This study aimed to identify factors that case managers perceive as predictive of recovery in people with musculoskeletal disorders after minor motor vehicle crash injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To explore the perspectives of cases managers in Australia and the United States, semi-structured interviews explored factors that case managers thought provided an early indication of likely recovery outcomes in people with musculoskeletal disorders after minor motor vehicle crash injury. A framework analysis was applied and factors were displayed within the ICF-framework. RESULTS: Case managers (n = 40) demonstrated a broad, detailed understanding of biopsychosocial and contextual issues influencing recovery. They emphasized the importance of the injured worker's expressed affect and motivation, style of communication, the role of lawyers, the worker's family and friends, as well as cultural and geographic influences. The overarching themes perceived as having a major influence on recovery outcomes were general health, pain processing and response, work situation, and compensation entitlement. CONCLUSIONS: Case managers' broad and detailed perceptions about recovery may provide additional, valuable perspectives for professionals involved in the rehabilitation process of people with musculoskeletal disorders after minor motor vehicle crash injury. Further research needs to be conducted to explore the effects of case manager involvement in the process of recovery.Implications for rehabilitationInsurance Case Managers identified multiple factors including affect and motivation, style of communication, the role of lawyers, family and friends, cultural and geographic variation provide opportunities for more effective treatment of people with musculoskeletal disorders related to minor motor vehicle collisions. These managers' perceptions about recovery may be informative to and provide opportunities for health professionals involved in the rehabilitation of people with musculoskeletal disorders related to minor motor vehicle collisions.While the Insurance Case Managers involved in this research did not use formalized assessment techniques, tools and assessment protocols could be developed jointly between for the needs of Insurance Case Managers and other stakeholders to tackle recovery of people with musculoskeletal disorders related to minor motor vehicle collision.

Health care professionals' attitudes towards evidence-based medicine in the workers' compensation setting: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Problems may arise during the approval process of treatment after a compensable work injury, which include excess paperwork, delays in approving services, disputes, and allegations of over-servicing. This is perceived as undesirable for injured people, health care professionals and claims managers, and costly to the health care system, compensation system, workplaces and society. Introducing an Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) decision tool in the workers' compensation system could provide a partial solution, by reducing uncertainty about effective treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate attitudes of health care professionals (HCP) to the potential implementation of an EBM tool in the workers' compensation setting. METHODS: The study has a mixed methods design. The quantitative study consisted of an online questionnaire asking about self-reported knowledge, attitudes and behaviour to EBM in general. The qualitative study consisted of interviews about an EBM tool being applied in the workers' compensation process. Participants were health care practitioners from different clinical specialties. They were recruited through the investigators' clinical networks and the workers' compensation government regulator's website. RESULTS: Participants completing the questionnaire (n = 231) indicated they were knowledgeable about the evidence-base in their field, but perceived some difficulties when applying EBM. General practitioners reported having the greatest obstacles to applying EBM. Participants who were interviewed (n = 15) perceived that an EBM tool in the workers' compensation setting could potentially have some advantages, such as reducing inappropriate treatment, or over-servicing, and providing guidance for clinicians. However, participants expressed substantial concerns that the EBM tool would not adequately reflect the impact of psychosocial factors on recovery. They also highlighted a lack of timeliness in decision making and proper assessment, particularly in pain management. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, HCP are supportive of EBM, but have strong concerns about implementation of EBM based decision making in the workers' compensation setting. The participants felt that an EBM tool should not be applied rigidly and should take into account clinical judgement and patient variability and preferences. In general, the treatment approval process in the workers' compensation insurance system is a sensitive area, in which the interaction between HCP and claims managers can be improved.

Differences in perceived fairness and health outcomes in two injury compensation systems: a comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Involvement in a compensation process following a motor vehicle collision is consistently associated with worse health status but the reasons underlying this are unclear. Some compensation systems are hypothesised to be more stressful than others. In particular, fault-based compensation systems are considered to be more adversarial than no-fault systems and associated with poorer recovery. This study compares the perceived fairness and recovery of claimants in the fault-based compensation system in New South Wales (NSW) to the no-fault system in Victoria, Australia. METHODS: One hundred eighty two participants were recruited via claims databases of the compensation system regulators in Victoria and NSW. Participants were > 18 years old and involved in a transport injury compensation process. The crash occurred 12 months (n = 95) or 24 months ago (n = 87). Perceived fairness about the compensation process was measured by items derived from a validated organisational justice questionnaire. Health outcome was measured by the initial question of the Short Form Health Survey. RESULTS: In Victoria, 84 % of the participants considered the claims process fair, compared to 46 % of NSW participants (χ(2) = 28.54; p < .001). Lawyer involvement and medical assessments were significantly associated with poorer perceived fairness. Overall perceived fairness was positively associated with health outcome after adjusting for demographic and injury variables (Adjusted Odds Ratio = 2.8, 95 % CI = 1.4 - 5.7, p = .004). CONCLUSION: The study shows large differences in perceived fairness between two different compensation systems and an association between fairness and health. These findings are politically important because compensation processes are designed to improve recovery. Lower perceived fairness in NSW may have been caused by potential adversarial aspects of the scheme, such as liability assessment, medical assessments, dealing with a third party for-profit insurance agency, or financial insecurity due to lump sum payments at settlement. This study should encourage an evidence informed discussion about how to reduce anti-therapeutic aspects in the compensation process in order to improve the injured person's health.

Predictors of time to claim closure following a non-catastrophic injury sustained in a motor vehicle crash: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Research suggests that exposure to the compensation system (including time to case closure) could adversely influence a persons' recovery following injury. However, the long-term predictors of time to claim closure following minor road traffic injuries remain unclear. We aimed to assess a wide spectrum of factors that could influence time to claim closure (socio-demographic, compensation-related, health, psychosocial and pre-injury factors) over 24 months following a non-catastrophic injury. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 364 participants involved in a compensation scheme following a motor vehicle crash. We used a telephone-administered questionnaire to obtain information on potential explanatory variables. Information on time to claim closure was obtained from an insurance regulatory authority maintained database, and was classified as the duration between the crash date and claim settlement date, and categorized into < 12 (early), > 12-24 (medium) and > 24 months (late). RESULTS: Just over half of claimants (54 %) had settled their claim by 12 months, while 17 % and 30 % took > 12-24 months and > 24 months for claim closure, respectively. Whiplash at baseline was associated with claim closure time of > 12-24 months versus < 12 months: multivariable-adjusted OR 2.38 (95 % CI 1.06-5.39). Claimants who were overweight/obese versus normal/underweight at the time of injury were ~3.0-fold more likely to settle their claim at > 12-24 months than < 12 months. Consulting a lawyer was associated with a 10.4- and 21.0-fold increased likelihood of settling a claim at > 12-24 months and > 24 months, respectively. Each 1-unit increase in Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire scores at baseline was associated with greater odds of both medium (> 12-24 months) and delayed claim settlement date (> 24 months): multivariable-adjusted OR 1.04 (95 % CU 1.01-1.07) and 1.02 (95 % CI 1.00-1.05), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Around a third of claimants with a minor injury had not settled by 24 months. Health-related factors and lawyer involvement independently influenced time to claim closure.

Factors that challenge health for people involved in the compensation process following a motor vehicle crash: a longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: Motor vehicle crashes (MVC) are associated with diminished mental health, and furthermore, evidence suggests the process of claiming compensation following an MVC further increases distress and impedes recovery. However, further research is required on why the compensation process is stressful. The aim of the current study is twofold. The first is to investigate whether the interaction with the insurance agency is associated with anxiety. The second is to explore qualitatively aspects of dissatisfaction with the compensation process. METHODS: Participants (N = 417) were injured people involved in a compensation scheme after a motor vehicle crash (MVC) in New South Wales, Australia. Interviews were conducted by phone at 2, 12 and 24 months after the MVC. A suite of measures were used including compensation related measures, pain catastrophising and the anxiety/depressed mood subscale of the EuroQol. The association between predictors and anxiety/depressed mood as the dependent variable were analysed using forward logistic regression analyses. The comments about dissatisfaction with the insurance company were analysed qualitatively. RESULTS: The strongest predictor of mood status found was pain-related catastrophising, followed by dissatisfaction with the insurance company. Dissatisfaction was attributed to (1) lack of communication and lack of information, (2) delayed or denied payments of compensation, (3) slow treatment approval and discussions about causality, (4) too much complicated paperwork, and (5) discussions about who was at-fault. CONCLUSIONS: Factors were found that contribute to anxiety in the compensation process. The association between catastrophising and anxiety/depressive mood suggests it is worthwhile further investigating the role of negative cognitions in compensation processes. People who score highly on catastrophising after the MVC may benefit from early psychological interventions aiming at addressing negative cognitions. Another important stressor is the interaction with the insurance company. Stress is associated with problems of communication, medical treatment, and claim settlement. This study additionally draws attention to some under recognised problems such as delayed payments. Pro-active claims management could address some of the identified issues, which could improve health of injured people after a MVC.

Does Blame Impede Health Recovery After Transport Accidents?

Blame towards the wrongdoer can be a source of distress for people who are injured in a transport accident. The association between blame and psychological stress is well investigated. In contrast, not much is known about blame and health-care utilization. It is important to investigate whether blame is associated with health-care consumption because it may contribute to our knowledge about what factors have an effect on recovery after transport accidents. The current study involved a total of 2940 participants, who were selected from a compensation database in Victoria, Australia. Health-care utilization, in general, and utilization of psychologist and physiotherapist visits, in particular, were defined as the outcome. In contrast to a previous study, it was found that blaming the other was associated with greater health-care utilization, in general, and psychologists and physiotherapist visits, specifically. Another relevant finding was that, although the study involved a sample that was created to show an equal ratio of blame/no-blame, 61 % blamed the other driver; therefore, blame may be a motive to lodge a claim. Finally, we discuss the role that psychologists and claim managers could play in reducing feelings of blame in order to reduce health-care utilization and possibly improve recovery.

Effectiveness of a web-based intervention for injured claimants: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is considerable evidence showing that injured people who are involved in a compensation process show poorer physical and mental recovery than those with similar injuries who are not involved in a compensation process. One explanation for this reduced recovery is that the legal process and the associated retraumatization are very stressful for the claimant. The aim of this study was to empower injured claimants in order to facilitate recovery. METHODS: Participants were recruited by three Dutch claims settlement offices. The participants had all been injured in a traffic crash and were involved in a compensation process. The study design was a randomized controlled trial. An intervention website was developed with (1) information about the compensation process, and (2) an evidence-based, therapist-assisted problem-solving course. The control website contained a few links to already existing websites. Outcome measures were empowerment, self-efficacy, health status (including depression, anxiety, and somatic symptoms), perceived fairness, ability to work, claims knowledge and extent of burden. The outcomes were self-reported through online questionnaires and were measured four times: at baseline, and at 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: In total, 176 participants completed the baseline questionnaire after which they were randomized into either the intervention group (n=88) or the control group (n=88). During the study, 35 participants (20%) dropped out. The intervention website was used by 55 participants (63%). The health outcomes of the intervention group were no different to those of the control group. However, the intervention group considered the received compensation to be fairer (P<0.01). The subgroup analysis of intervention users versus nonusers did not reveal significant results. The intervention website was evaluated positively. CONCLUSIONS: Although the web-based intervention was not used enough to improve the health of injured claimants in compensation processes, it increased the perceived fairness of the compensation amount. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR2360.

Do claim factors predict health care utilization after transport accidents?

BACKGROUND: Injured people who are involved in compensation processes have less recovery and less well-being compared to those not involved in claims settlement procedures. This study investigated whether claim factors, such as no-fault versus common law claims, the number of independent medical assessments, and legal disputes, predict health care utilization after transport accidents. METHOD: The sample consisted of 68,911 claimants who lodged a compensation claim at the Transport Accident Commission (TAC) in Victoria, Australia, between 2000 and 2005. The main outcome measure was health care utilization, which was defined as the number of visits to health care providers (e.g. general practitioners, physiotherapists, psychologists) during the 5 year period post-accident. RESULTS: After correction for gender, age, role in accident, injury type, and severity of injury, it was found that independent medical assessments were associated with greater health care utilization (ß=.36, p<.001). Involvement in common law claims and legal disputes were both significantly related to health care utilization (respectively ß=.05, p<.001 and ß=-.02, p<.001), however, the standardized betas were negligible, therefore the effect is not clinically relevant. A model including claim factors predicted the number of health care visits significantly better (ΔR(2)=.08, p<.001) than a model including only gender, age, role in accident, injury type, and severity of injury. CONCLUSION: The positive association between the number of independent medical assessments and health care utilization after transport accidents may imply that numerous medical assessments have a negative effect on claimants' health. However, further research is needed to determine a causal relationship.

Procedural justice and quality of life in compensation processes.

BACKGROUND: There is considerable evidence that being involved in compensation processes has a negative impact on claimants' health. Previous studies suggested that this negative effect is caused by a stressful compensation process: claimants suffered from a lack of communication, a lack of information, and feelings of distrust. However, these rather qualitative findings have not been quantitatively investigated yet. This observational study aimed to fill this gap of knowledge, investigating the claimants' perceived fairness of the compensation process, the provided information, and the interaction with lawyers and insurance companies, in relation to the claimants' quality of life. METHOD: Participants were individuals injured in traffic accidents, older than 18 years, who were involved in a compensation process in the Netherlands. They were recruited by three claims settlement offices. Outcome measures were procedural, interactional, and informational justice, and quality of life. RESULTS: Participants (n=176) perceived the interaction with lawyers to be fairer than the interaction with insurance companies (p<.001). The length of hospital stay was positively associated with procedural justice (ß=.31, p<.001). Having trunk/back injury was negatively related to procedural justice (ß=-.25, p=.001). Whiplash injury and length of time involved in the claim process were not associated with any of the justice scales. Finally, procedural justice was found to be positively correlated with quality of life (rs=.22, p=.004). DISCUSSION: The finding that the interaction with insurance companies was considered less fair than the interaction with lawyers may imply that insurers could improve their interaction with claimants, e.g. by communicating more directly. The result that claimants with mild injuries and with trunk/back injuries considered the compensation process to be less fair than those with respectively severe injuries and injuries to other body parts suggests that especially the former two require an attentive treatment. Finally, the fact that procedural justice was positively correlated with quality of life could implicate that it is possible to improve claimants' health in compensation processes by enhancing procedural justice, e.g. by increasing the ability for claimants to express their views and feelings and by involving claimants in the decision-making process.

Do compensation processes impair mental health? A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Victims who are involved in a compensation processes generally have more health complaints compared to victims who are not involved in a compensation process. Previous research regarding the effect of compensation processes has concentrated on the effect on physical health. This meta-analysis focuses on the effect of compensation processes on mental health. METHOD: Prospective cohort studies addressing compensation and mental health after traffic accidents, occupational accidents or medical errors were identified using PubMed, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library. Relevant studies published between January 1966 and 10 June 2011 were selected for inclusion. RESULTS: Ten studies were included. The first finding was that the compensation group already had higher mental health complaints at baseline compared to the non-compensation group (standardised mean difference (SMD)=-0.38; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.66 to -0.10; p=.01). The second finding was that mental health between baseline and post measurement improved less in the compensation group compared to the non-compensation group (SMD=-0.35; 95% CI -0.70 to -0.01; p=.05). However, the quality of evidence was limited, mainly because of low quality study design and heterogeneity. DISCUSSION: Being involved in a compensation process is associated with higher mental health complaints but three-quarters of the difference appeared to be already present at baseline. The findings of this study should be interpreted with caution because of the limited quality of evidence. The difference at baseline may be explained by a selection bias or more anger and blame about the accident in the compensation group. The difference between baseline and follow-up may be explained by secondary gain and secondary victimisation. Future research should involve assessment of exposure to compensation processes, should analyse and correct for baseline differences, and could examine the effect of time, compensation scheme design, and claim settlement on (mental) health.

Exploring Lawyer-Client Interaction: A Qualitative Study of Positive Lawyer Characteristics.

Personal injury victims involved in compensation processes have a worse recovery than those not involved in compensation processes. One predictor for worse recovery is lawyer engagement. As some people argue that this negative relation between lawyer engagement and recovery may be explained by lawyers' attitude and communications to clients, it seems important to investigate lawyer-client interaction. Although procedural justice and therapeutic jurisprudence had previously discussed aspects relevant for lawyer-client interaction, the client's perspective has been rather ignored and only few empirical studies have been conducted. In this qualitative study, 21 traffic accident victims were interviewed about their experiences with their lawyer. Five desirable characteristics for lawyers were identified: communication, empathy, decisiveness, independence, and expertise. Communication and empathy corresponded with aspects already discussed in literature, whereas decisiveness, independence and expertise had been addressed only marginally. Further qualitative and quantitative research is necessary to establish preferable lawyer characteristics and to investigate what would improve the well-being of personal injury victims during the claims settlement process.

Empowerment of personal injury victims through the internet: design of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Research has shown that current claims settlement process can have a negative impact on psychological and physical recovery of personal injury (PI) victims. One of the explanations for the negative impact on health is that the claims settlement process is a stressful experience and victims suffer from renewed victimization caused by the claims settlement process. PI victims can experience a lack of information, lack of involvement, lack of 'voice', and poor communication. We present the first study that aims to empower PI victims with respect to the negative impact of the claims settlement process by means of an internet intervention. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a two armed, randomized controlled trial (RCT), in which 170 PI victims are randomized to either the intervention or control group. The intervention group will get access to a website providing 1) an information module, so participants learn what is happening and what to expect during the claims settlement process, and 2) an e-coach module, so participants learn to cope with problems they experience during the claims settlement process. The control group will get access to a website with hyperlinks to commonly available information only. Participants will be recruited via a PI claims settlement office. Participants are included if they have been involved in a traffic accident which happened less than two years ago, and are at least 18 years old.The main study parameter is the increase of empowerment within the intervention group compared to the control group. Empowerment will be measured by the mastery scale and a self-efficacy scale. The secondary outcomes are perceived justice, burden, well being, work ability, knowledge, amount of damages, and lawyer-client communication. Data are collected at baseline (T0 measurement before randomization), at three months, six months, and twelve months after baseline. Analyses will be conducted according to the intention-to-treat principle. DISCUSSION: This study evaluates the effectiveness of an internet intervention aimed at empowerment of PI victims. The results will give more insight into the impact of compensation proceedings on health over time, and they can have important consequences for legal claims settlement. Strengths and limitations of this study are discussed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR2360.

Effectiveness of web-based interventions on patient empowerment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patient empowerment is growing in popularity and application. Due to the increasing possibilities of the Internet and eHealth, many initiatives that are aimed at empowering patients are delivered online. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate whether Web-based interventions are effective in increasing patient empowerment compared with usual care or face-to-face interventions. METHODS: We performed a systematic review by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases from January 1985 to January 2009 for relevant citations. From the 7096 unique citations retrieved from the search strategy, we included 14 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that met all inclusion criteria. Pairs of review authors assessed the methodological quality of the obtained studies using the Downs and Black checklist. A meta-analysis was performed on studies that measured comparable outcomes. The GRADE approach was used to determine the level of evidence for each outcome. RESULTS: In comparison with usual care or no care, Web-based interventions had a significant positive effect on empowerment measured with the Diabetes Empowerment Scale (2 studies, standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29 - 0.94]), on self-efficacy measured with disease-specific self-efficacy scales (9 studies, SMD = 0.23, 95% CI 0.12 - 0.33), and on mastery measured with the Pearlin Mastery Scale (1 study, mean difference [MD] = 2.95, 95% CI 1.66 - 4.24). No effects were found for self-efficacy measured with general self-efficacy scales (3 studies, SMD = 0.05, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.35) or for self-esteem measured with the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (1 study, MD = -0.38, 95% CI -2.45 to 1.69). Furthermore, when comparing Web-based interventions with face-to-face deliveries of the same interventions, no significant (beneficial or harmful) effects were found for mastery (1 study, MD = 1.20, 95% CI -1.73 to 4.13) and self-esteem (1 study, MD = -0.10, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.25). CONCLUSIONS: Web-based interventions showed positive effects on empowerment measured with the Diabetes Empowerment Scale, disease-specific self-efficacy scales and the Pearlin Mastery Scale. Because of the low quality of evidence we found, the results should be interpreted with caution. The clinical relevance of the findings can be questioned because the significant effects we found were, in general, small.