OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to learn about community members' definitions and types of harm from medical mistakes. METHODS: Mixed methods study using community-based participatory research (CBPR). The High Plains Research Network (HPRN) with its Community Advisory Council (CAC) designed and distributed an anonymous survey through local community newspapers. Survey included open-ended questions on patients' experiences with medical mistakes and resultant harm. Qualitative analysis was performed by CAC and research team members on mistake descriptions and types of reported harm. Patient Safety Taxonomy coding was performed on a subset of surveys that contained actual medical errors. RESULTS: A total of 286 surveys were returned, with 172 respondents (60%) reporting a total of 180 perceived medical mistakes. Quantitative analysis showed that 41% of perceived mistakes (n = 73) involved only unanticipated outcomes. Reported types of harm included emotional, financial, and physical harm. Reports suggest that perceived clinician indifference to unanticipated outcomes may lead to patients' loss of trust and belief that the unexpected outcome was a result of an error. DISCUSSION: CBPR methodology is an important strategy to design and implement a community-based survey. Community members reported experiencing medical mistakes, most with harmful outcomes. The response they received by the medical community may have influenced their perception of mistake and harm.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to learn about community members' definitions and types of harm from medical mistakes. METHODS: Mixed methods study using community-based participatory research (CBPR). The High Plains Research Network (HPRN) with its Community Advisory Council (CAC) designed and distributed an anonymous survey through local community newspapers. Survey included open-ended questions on patients' experiences with medical mistakes and resultant harm. Qualitative analysis was performed by CAC and research team members on mistake descriptions and types of reported harm. Patient Safety Taxonomy coding was performed on a subset of surveys that contained actual medical errors. RESULTS: A total of 286 surveys were returned, with 172 respondents (60%) reporting a total of 180 perceived medical mistakes. Quantitative analysis showed that 41% of perceived mistakes (n = 73) involved only unanticipated outcomes. Reported types of harm included emotional, financial, and physical harm. Reports suggest that perceived clinician indifference to unanticipated outcomes may lead to patients' loss of trust and belief that the unexpected outcome was a result of an error. DISCUSSION: CBPR methodology is an important strategy to design and implement a community-based survey. Community members reported experiencing medical mistakes, most with harmful outcomes. The response they received by the medical community may have influenced their perception of mistake and harm.
Authors: Ned Norman; Chris Bennett; Shirley Cowart; Maret Felzien; Martha Flores; Rafael Flores; Connie Haynes; Mike Hernandez; Mary Petra Rodriquez; Norah Sanchez; Sergio Sanchez; Kathy Winkelman; Steve Winkelman; Linda Zittleman; John M Westfall Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2013 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Madelene J Ottosen; Emily W Sedlock; Aitebureme O Aigbe; Sigall K Bell; Thomas H Gallagher; Eric J Thomas Journal: J Patient Saf Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 2.844
Authors: Ahmed S Al-Mandhari; Mohammed A Al-Shafaee; Mohammed H Al-Azri; Ibrahim S Al-Zakwani; Mushtaq Khan; Ahmed M Al-Waily; Syed Rizvi Journal: BMC Med Ethics Date: 2008-07-29 Impact factor: 2.652