BACKGROUND: As patients directly experience harm from adverse events, investigators have proposed patient-report to complement professional reporting of adverse events. OBJECTIVE: To investigate how an automated health assessment system can be used to identify adverse events. DESIGN AND SETTING: Internet survey responses from April 2003 to April 2005 involving communities and clinical practices across the USA. PATIENTS: 44,860 adults aged 19-69 years. OUTCOME: Patient perceptions of adverse events experienced during the previous year. Independent legal review was also used to estimate how many patient-reports were serious enough to be potentially compensable. RESULTS: Although patient reports of possible adverse events was low (1.4%), the percentage of adverse events was eight times higher for patients with the greatest burden of illness than for those with the least (3.4% vs 0.4%). Two expert malpractice attorneys agreed that 9% of the adverse events seemed to be serious. CONCLUSIONS: PATIENTS will use internet technology to report their perceptions of health-related adverse events. Some of the patient-reported events reported will be serious.
BACKGROUND: As patients directly experience harm from adverse events, investigators have proposed patient-report to complement professional reporting of adverse events. OBJECTIVE: To investigate how an automated health assessment system can be used to identify adverse events. DESIGN AND SETTING: Internet survey responses from April 2003 to April 2005 involving communities and clinical practices across the USA. PATIENTS: 44,860 adults aged 19-69 years. OUTCOME: Patient perceptions of adverse events experienced during the previous year. Independent legal review was also used to estimate how many patient-reports were serious enough to be potentially compensable. RESULTS: Although patient reports of possible adverse events was low (1.4%), the percentage of adverse events was eight times higher for patients with the greatest burden of illness than for those with the least (3.4% vs 0.4%). Two expert malpractice attorneys agreed that 9% of the adverse events seemed to be serious. CONCLUSIONS:PATIENTS will use internet technology to report their perceptions of health-related adverse events. Some of the patient-reported events reported will be serious.
Authors: Saul N Weingart; Odelya Pagovich; Daniel Z Sands; Joseph M Li; Mark D Aronson; Roger B Davis; David W Bates; Russell S Phillips Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Tim A Ahles; John H Wasson; Janette L Seville; Deborah J Johnson; Bernard F Cole; Brett Hanscom; Therese A Stukel; Elizabeth McKinstry Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2006 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Anton J Kuzel; Steven H Woolf; Valerie J Gilchrist; John D Engel; Thomas A LaVeist; Charles Vincent; Richard M Frankel Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2004 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Saul N Weingart; Junya Zhu; Laurel Chiappetta; Sherri O Stuver; Eric C Schneider; Arnold M Epstein; Jo Ann David-Kasdan; Catherine L Annas; Floyd J Fowler; Joel S Weissman Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2011-02-09 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: Alan G Wade; Gordon M Crawford; Neil Pumford; Volker Koscielny; Susan Maycock; Alex McConnachie Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2011-06-14 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Susan J Stocks; Ailsa Donnelly; Aneez Esmail; Joanne Beresford; Carolyn Gamble; Sarah Luty; Richard Deacon; Avril Danczak; Nicola Mann; David Townsend; James Ashley; Paul Bowie; Stephen M Campbell Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-02-03 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Duaa Aljabri; Adrian Dumitrascu; M Caroline Burton; Launia White; Mahmud Khan; Sudha Xirasagar; Ronnie Horner; James Naessens Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2018-07-27 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Susan Jill Stocks; Ailsa Donnelly; Aneez Esmail; Joanne Beresford; Sarah Luty; Richard Deacon; Avril Danczak; Nicola Mann; David Townsend; James Ashley; Carolyn Gamble; Paul Bowie; Stephen M Campbell Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-06-13 Impact factor: 2.692