Suzanne B Evans1, James B Yu, Anees Chagpar. 1. Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut 06510-8040, USA. Suzannne.evans@yale.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze error disclosure attitudes of radiation oncologists and to correlate error disclosure beliefs with survey-assessed disclosure behavior. METHODS AND MATERIALS: With institutional review board exemption, an anonymous online survey was devised. An email invitation was sent to radiation oncologists (American Society for Radiation Oncology [ASTRO] gold medal winners, program directors and chair persons of academic institutions, and former ASTRO lecturers) and residents. A disclosure score was calculated based on the number or full, partial, or no disclosure responses chosen to the vignette-based questions, and correlation was attempted with attitudes toward error disclosure. RESULTS: The survey received 176 responses: 94.8% of respondents considered themselves more likely to disclose in the setting of a serious medical error; 72.7% of respondents did not feel it mattered who was responsible for the error in deciding to disclose, and 3.9% felt more likely to disclose if someone else was responsible; 38.0% of respondents felt that disclosure increased the likelihood of a lawsuit, and 32.4% felt disclosure decreased the likelihood of lawsuit; 71.6% of respondents felt near misses should not be disclosed; 51.7% thought that minor errors should not be disclosed; 64.7% viewed disclosure as an opportunity for forgiveness from the patient; and 44.6% considered the patient's level of confidence in them to be a factor in disclosure. For a scenario that could be considerable, a non-harmful error, 78.9% of respondents would not contact the family. Respondents with high disclosure scores were more likely to feel that disclosure was an opportunity for forgiveness (P=.003) and to have never seen major medical errors (P=.004). CONCLUSIONS: The surveyed radiation oncologists chose to respond with full disclosure at a high rate, although ideal disclosure practices were not uniformly adhered to beyond the initial decision to disclose the occurrence of the error.
PURPOSE: To analyze error disclosure attitudes of radiation oncologists and to correlate error disclosure beliefs with survey-assessed disclosure behavior. METHODS AND MATERIALS: With institutional review board exemption, an anonymous online survey was devised. An email invitation was sent to radiation oncologists (American Society for Radiation Oncology [ASTRO] gold medal winners, program directors and chair persons of academic institutions, and former ASTRO lecturers) and residents. A disclosure score was calculated based on the number or full, partial, or no disclosure responses chosen to the vignette-based questions, and correlation was attempted with attitudes toward error disclosure. RESULTS: The survey received 176 responses: 94.8% of respondents considered themselves more likely to disclose in the setting of a serious medical error; 72.7% of respondents did not feel it mattered who was responsible for the error in deciding to disclose, and 3.9% felt more likely to disclose if someone else was responsible; 38.0% of respondents felt that disclosure increased the likelihood of a lawsuit, and 32.4% felt disclosure decreased the likelihood of lawsuit; 71.6% of respondents felt near misses should not be disclosed; 51.7% thought that minor errors should not be disclosed; 64.7% viewed disclosure as an opportunity for forgiveness from the patient; and 44.6% considered the patient's level of confidence in them to be a factor in disclosure. For a scenario that could be considerable, a non-harmful error, 78.9% of respondents would not contact the family. Respondents with high disclosure scores were more likely to feel that disclosure was an opportunity for forgiveness (P=.003) and to have never seen major medical errors (P=.004). CONCLUSIONS: The surveyed radiation oncologists chose to respond with full disclosure at a high rate, although ideal disclosure practices were not uniformly adhered to beyond the initial decision to disclose the occurrence of the error.
Authors: Eric C Ford; Matthew Nyflot; Matthew B Spraker; Gabrielle Kane; Kristi R G Hendrickson Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2017-09-12 Impact factor: 2.102