A qualitative study of patient (dis)trust in public and private hospitals: the importance of choice and pragmatic acceptance for trust considerations in South Australia.

Paul R Ward,Mariastella Pulvirenti,Samantha Meyer,Clinton Cenko,Philippa Rokkas,Nicola Dean,Simon Carney,Michael Calnan,Patrick Brown

doi:10.1186/s12913-015-0967-0

Abstract

BackgroundThis paper explores the nature and reasoning for (dis)trust in Australian public and private hospitals. Patient trust increases uptake of, engagement with and optimal outcomes from healthcare services and is therefore central to health practice, policy and planning.MethodsA qualitative study in South Australia, including 36 in-depth interviews (18 from public and 18 from private hospitals).Results‘Private patients’ made active choices about both their hospital and doctor, playing the role of the ‘consumer’, where trust and choice went hand in hand. The reputation of the doctor and hospital were key drivers of trust, under the assumption that a better reputation equates with higher quality care. However, making a choice to trust a doctor led to personal responsibility and the additional requirement for self-trust. ‘Public patients’ described having no choice in their hospital or doctor. They recognised ‘problems’ in the public healthcare system but accepted and even excused these as ‘part of the system’. In order to justify their trust, they argued that doctors in public hospitals tried to do their best in difficult circumstances, thereby deserving of trust. This ‘resigned trust’ may stem from a lack of alternatives for free health care and thus a dependence on the system.ConclusionThese two contrasting models of trust within the same locality point to the way different configurations of healthcare systems, hospital experiences, insurance coverage and related forms of ‘choice’ combine to shape different formats of trust, as patients act to manage their vulnerability within these contexts.

Highlights

This paper explores the nature and reasoning fortrust in Australian public and private hospitals
Bauer argues for a social science discipline of ‘resistology’ which attempts to document and understand the nature of ‘choice’ under conditions of uncertainty in late modernity, responses which are often manifest by trust/ distrust [27]
Since ‘choice’ is linked to trust [51, 70], we aimed to access a mix of patients who undergoing urgent, semi-urgent and non-urgent procedures, in both private and public services

Summary

Introduction

This paper explores the nature and reasoning for (dis)trust in Australian public and private hospitals. The issue of trust in hospitals is of increasing importance in view of the reported decline in trust in Western healthcare systems in general [1, 2], linked to wider public distrust in a number of institutions and individuals [3, 4]. Bauer argues for a social science discipline of ‘resistology’ which attempts to document and understand the nature of ‘choice’ under conditions of uncertainty in late modernity, responses which are often manifest by trust/ distrust [27]. The issue of ‘choice’ is central to the issue of trust in public and private healthcare and hospitals, since choice is an underpinning ideology in the private setting is largely absent in the public setting

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion