OBJECTIVE: To assess whether patients' perceptions of a hypothetical medical error are influenced by staff responsiveness, disclosure of error, and health consequences of the error. DESIGN: Hypothetical scenario describing a medication error submitted by mail. Three factors were manipulated at random: rapid v slow staff responsiveness to error; disclosure v non-disclosure of the error; and occurrence of serious v minor health consequences. PARTICIPANTS: Patients discharged from hospital. MEASURES: Assessment of care described in the scenario as bad or very bad, rating of care as unsafe, and intent to not recommend the hospital. RESULTS: Of 1274 participants who evaluated the scenario, 71.4% rated health care as bad or very bad, 60.2% rated healthcare conditions as unsafe, and 25.5% stated that they would not recommend the hospital. Rating health care as bad or very bad was associated with slow reaction to error (odds ratio (OR) 2.8, 95% CI 2.1 to 3.6), non-disclosure of error (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.5 to 2.6), and serious health consequences (OR 3.4, 95% CI 2.6 to 4.5). Similar associations were observed for rating healthcare conditions as unsafe and the intent to not recommend the hospital. Younger patients were more sensitive to non-disclosure than older patients. CONCLUSIONS: Former patients view medical errors less favorably when hospital staff react slowly, when the error is not disclosed to the patient, and when the patient suffers serious health consequences.
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether patients' perceptions of a hypothetical medical error are influenced by staff responsiveness, disclosure of error, and health consequences of the error. DESIGN: Hypothetical scenario describing a medication error submitted by mail. Three factors were manipulated at random: rapid v slow staff responsiveness to error; disclosure v non-disclosure of the error; and occurrence of serious v minor health consequences. PARTICIPANTS: Patients discharged from hospital. MEASURES: Assessment of care described in the scenario as bad or very bad, rating of care as unsafe, and intent to not recommend the hospital. RESULTS: Of 1274 participants who evaluated the scenario, 71.4% rated health care as bad or very bad, 60.2% rated healthcare conditions as unsafe, and 25.5% stated that they would not recommend the hospital. Rating health care as bad or very bad was associated with slow reaction to error (odds ratio (OR) 2.8, 95% CI 2.1 to 3.6), non-disclosure of error (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.5 to 2.6), and serious health consequences (OR 3.4, 95% CI 2.6 to 4.5). Similar associations were observed for rating healthcare conditions as unsafe and the intent to not recommend the hospital. Younger patients were more sensitive to non-disclosure than older patients. CONCLUSIONS: Former patients view medical errors less favorably when hospital staff react slowly, when the error is not disclosed to the patient, and when the patient suffers serious health consequences.
Authors: Robert J Blendon; Catherine M DesRoches; Mollyann Brodie; John M Benson; Allison B Rosen; Eric Schneider; Drew E Altman; Kinga Zapert; Melissa J Herrmann; Annie E Steffenson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-12-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Andrew R Robinson; Kirsten B Hohmann; Julie I Rifkin; Daniel Topp; Christine M Gilroy; Jeffrey A Pickard; Robert J Anderson Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2002-10-28
Authors: Rae M Lamb; David M Studdert; Richard M J Bohmer; Donald M Berwick; Troyen A Brennan Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2003 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Kathleen M Mazor; Steven R Simon; Robert A Yood; Brian C Martinson; Margaret J Gunter; George W Reed; Jerry H Gurwitz Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2004-03-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Lauris C Kaldjian; Elizabeth W Jones; Barry J Wu; Valerie L Forman-Hoffman; Benjamin H Levi; Gary E Rosenthal Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-05-01 Impact factor: 5.128