hands reading books.jpg

Upheld complaints

Upheld Complaints – January 2018

Following the inquiry into patient care at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust, Robert Francis recommended that NHS trusts should publish information about upheld complaints on their website. As part of our commitment to share information and improve learning, Mersey Care NHS Trust publishes upheld complaints every month on our website.

Every year the trust receives approximately 500 complaints from service users, relatives and carers in both local and high secure services.

If a complaint is received which relates to one specific issue, and substantive evidence is found to support the allegation made, the complaint is recorded as ‘upheld’.

If a complaint is made regarding more than one issue, and one or more of these issues are upheld, the complaint is recorded as ‘partially upheld’.

Where there is no evidence to support any allegations made, the complaint is recorded as ‘not upheld’.

Sometimes it’s possible to resolve a complaint by arranging a meeting with the complainant and those involved in the care of the service user, for example, the consultant psychiatrist, team leader or service manager. Other times, it’s more appropriate to formally investigate a complaint, after which a response letter is sent to the complainant from the Chief Executive.

It is the responsibility of the Complaints Department to identify any trends or themes within particular services, on certain wards etc., to see what action can be taken by the trust to prevent the same issues recurring in the future.

.............................................................................................................................................

The following complaints were closed and upheld/partially upheld in January 2018:

A service user raised concerns regarding a member of staff leaving a message on her telephone

Action: An apology was provided to the service user and discussed at Team Meeting.

A service user raised concerns regarding information that was shared with the service user’s family without permission.

Action: An apology was provided to the service user and discussed at Team Meeting.

A relative raised concerns regarding lack of communication with the Team.

Action: An apology was provided regarding a change of meeting venue that was not shared with the relative.

A service user raised concerns regarding not being able to contact his Advocate.

Action taken: An apology was provided and concerns shared with Advocacy to take forward.