Timothy C Clapper1, Kevin Ching1,2. 1. Weill Cornell Medicine New York-Presbyterian Simulation Program and Center, Department of Pediatrics, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Many articles, book chapters and presentations begin with a declaration that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication. However, this statement may not be supported by the research reported in the literature. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this systematic review is to identify where errors are reported in the research literature. METHODS: A systematised review was conducted of research articles over the last 20 years (1998-2018) indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) using term combinations: medical errors, research and communication. Inclusion was based on reported generalised primary research of medical error and the reported causes. RESULTS: This systematised review resulted in 2881 research articles, which produced 42 that met the inclusion criteria. Although there was some overlap, three categories of errors were dominant in this research: errors of commission (20 articles; 47.6%), errors of omission (six articles; 14.2%) and errors through communication (four articles; 9.5%). There were 12 (28.5%) articles in which all three categories together significantly contributed to error. Of these 12 articles, errors of commission or omission were dominant in nine articles (21.4%) and errors of communication were prevalent in only three articles (7%). CONCLUSIONS: The assertion that the majority of medical errors can be attributed to miscommunication is not supported by this systematic review. Overwhelmingly, most reported errors are attributed to errors of omission or commission. Intentionally or unintentionally providing misinformation may mislead patient safety initiatives, and research and funding agency priorities.
CONTEXT: Many articles, book chapters and presentations begin with a declaration that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication. However, this statement may not be supported by the research reported in the literature. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this systematic review is to identify where errors are reported in the research literature. METHODS: A systematised review was conducted of research articles over the last 20 years (1998-2018) indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) using term combinations: medical errors, research and communication. Inclusion was based on reported generalised primary research of medical error and the reported causes. RESULTS: This systematised review resulted in 2881 research articles, which produced 42 that met the inclusion criteria. Although there was some overlap, three categories of errors were dominant in this research: errors of commission (20 articles; 47.6%), errors of omission (six articles; 14.2%) and errors through communication (four articles; 9.5%). There were 12 (28.5%) articles in which all three categories together significantly contributed to error. Of these 12 articles, errors of commission or omission were dominant in nine articles (21.4%) and errors of communication were prevalent in only three articles (7%). CONCLUSIONS: The assertion that the majority of medical errors can be attributed to miscommunication is not supported by this systematic review. Overwhelmingly, most reported errors are attributed to errors of omission or commission. Intentionally or unintentionally providing misinformation may mislead patient safety initiatives, and research and funding agency priorities.
Authors: Natasja Looman; Cornelia Fluit; Marielle van Wijngaarden; Esther de Groot; Patrick Dielissen; Dieneke van Asselt; Jacqueline de Graaf; Nynke Scherpbier-de Haan Journal: Med Educ Date: 2020-08-14 Impact factor: 6.251
Authors: Gabriel A Molina; Andres V Ayala; Alberto C Arcia; Galo E Jiménez; Estefany J Proaño; C Augusto Cadena; Andres Jimenez; Paula M Raza Journal: Ann Med Surg (Lond) Date: 2022-04-04