Beyond the medical record: Other modes of error acknowledgment

Marilynn M. Rosenthal, Patricia L. Cornett, Kathleen Sutcliffe, Elizabeth Lewton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Studies before and since the 1999 Institute of Medicine report have noted the limitations of using medical record reporting for reliably quantifying and understanding medical error. Quantitative macro analyses of large datasets should be supplemented by small-scale qualitative studies to provide insight into micro-level daily events in clinical and hospital practice that contribute to errors and adverse events and how they are reported. DESIGN: The study design involved semistructured face-to-face interviews with residents about the medical errors in which they recently had been involved and included questions regarding how those errors were acknowledged. OBJECTIVE: This paper reports the ways in which medical error is or is not reported and residents' responses to a perceived medical error. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-six residents were randomly sampled from a total population of 85 residents working in a 600-bed teaching hospital. MEASUREMENTS: Outcome measures were based on analysis of cases residents described. Using Ethnograph and traditional methods of content analysis, cases were categorized as Documented. Discussed, and Uncertain. RESULTS: Of 73 cases. 30 (41.1%) were formally acknowledged and Documented in the medical record; 24 (32.9%) were addressed through Discussions but not documented; 19 cases (26%) cases were classified as Uncertain. Twelve cases Involved medication errors, which were acknowledged in different categories. CONCLUSIONS: The supervisory discussion, the informal discussion, and near-miss contain important information for improving clinical care. Our study also shows the need to improve residents' education to prepare them to recognize and address medical errors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)404-409
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of General Internal Medicine
Volume20
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Medical Errors
Medical Records
Medication Errors
National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (U.S.) Health and Medicine Division
Teaching Hospitals
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Interviews
Education
Population

Keywords

  • Counting medical errors
  • Medical error
  • Medical error acknowledgement
  • Medical mistake

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Beyond the medical record : Other modes of error acknowledgment. / Rosenthal, Marilynn M.; Cornett, Patricia L.; Sutcliffe, Kathleen; Lewton, Elizabeth.

In: Journal of General Internal Medicine, Vol. 20, No. 5, 01.05.2005, p. 404-409.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rosenthal, Marilynn M. ; Cornett, Patricia L. ; Sutcliffe, Kathleen ; Lewton, Elizabeth. / Beyond the medical record : Other modes of error acknowledgment. In: Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2005 ; Vol. 20, No. 5. pp. 404-409.
@article{17b58d3e00af4a7ca113fd8d99a40f99,
title = "Beyond the medical record: Other modes of error acknowledgment",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Studies before and since the 1999 Institute of Medicine report have noted the limitations of using medical record reporting for reliably quantifying and understanding medical error. Quantitative macro analyses of large datasets should be supplemented by small-scale qualitative studies to provide insight into micro-level daily events in clinical and hospital practice that contribute to errors and adverse events and how they are reported. DESIGN: The study design involved semistructured face-to-face interviews with residents about the medical errors in which they recently had been involved and included questions regarding how those errors were acknowledged. OBJECTIVE: This paper reports the ways in which medical error is or is not reported and residents' responses to a perceived medical error. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-six residents were randomly sampled from a total population of 85 residents working in a 600-bed teaching hospital. MEASUREMENTS: Outcome measures were based on analysis of cases residents described. Using Ethnograph and traditional methods of content analysis, cases were categorized as Documented. Discussed, and Uncertain. RESULTS: Of 73 cases. 30 (41.1{\%}) were formally acknowledged and Documented in the medical record; 24 (32.9{\%}) were addressed through Discussions but not documented; 19 cases (26{\%}) cases were classified as Uncertain. Twelve cases Involved medication errors, which were acknowledged in different categories. CONCLUSIONS: The supervisory discussion, the informal discussion, and near-miss contain important information for improving clinical care. Our study also shows the need to improve residents' education to prepare them to recognize and address medical errors.",
keywords = "Counting medical errors, Medical error, Medical error acknowledgement, Medical mistake",
author = "Rosenthal, {Marilynn M.} and Cornett, {Patricia L.} and Kathleen Sutcliffe and Elizabeth Lewton",
year = "2005",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0098.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "404--409",
journal = "Journal of General Internal Medicine",
issn = "0884-8734",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Beyond the medical record

T2 - Other modes of error acknowledgment

AU - Rosenthal, Marilynn M.

AU - Cornett, Patricia L.

AU - Sutcliffe, Kathleen

AU - Lewton, Elizabeth

PY - 2005/5/1

Y1 - 2005/5/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: Studies before and since the 1999 Institute of Medicine report have noted the limitations of using medical record reporting for reliably quantifying and understanding medical error. Quantitative macro analyses of large datasets should be supplemented by small-scale qualitative studies to provide insight into micro-level daily events in clinical and hospital practice that contribute to errors and adverse events and how they are reported. DESIGN: The study design involved semistructured face-to-face interviews with residents about the medical errors in which they recently had been involved and included questions regarding how those errors were acknowledged. OBJECTIVE: This paper reports the ways in which medical error is or is not reported and residents' responses to a perceived medical error. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-six residents were randomly sampled from a total population of 85 residents working in a 600-bed teaching hospital. MEASUREMENTS: Outcome measures were based on analysis of cases residents described. Using Ethnograph and traditional methods of content analysis, cases were categorized as Documented. Discussed, and Uncertain. RESULTS: Of 73 cases. 30 (41.1%) were formally acknowledged and Documented in the medical record; 24 (32.9%) were addressed through Discussions but not documented; 19 cases (26%) cases were classified as Uncertain. Twelve cases Involved medication errors, which were acknowledged in different categories. CONCLUSIONS: The supervisory discussion, the informal discussion, and near-miss contain important information for improving clinical care. Our study also shows the need to improve residents' education to prepare them to recognize and address medical errors.

AB - BACKGROUND: Studies before and since the 1999 Institute of Medicine report have noted the limitations of using medical record reporting for reliably quantifying and understanding medical error. Quantitative macro analyses of large datasets should be supplemented by small-scale qualitative studies to provide insight into micro-level daily events in clinical and hospital practice that contribute to errors and adverse events and how they are reported. DESIGN: The study design involved semistructured face-to-face interviews with residents about the medical errors in which they recently had been involved and included questions regarding how those errors were acknowledged. OBJECTIVE: This paper reports the ways in which medical error is or is not reported and residents' responses to a perceived medical error. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-six residents were randomly sampled from a total population of 85 residents working in a 600-bed teaching hospital. MEASUREMENTS: Outcome measures were based on analysis of cases residents described. Using Ethnograph and traditional methods of content analysis, cases were categorized as Documented. Discussed, and Uncertain. RESULTS: Of 73 cases. 30 (41.1%) were formally acknowledged and Documented in the medical record; 24 (32.9%) were addressed through Discussions but not documented; 19 cases (26%) cases were classified as Uncertain. Twelve cases Involved medication errors, which were acknowledged in different categories. CONCLUSIONS: The supervisory discussion, the informal discussion, and near-miss contain important information for improving clinical care. Our study also shows the need to improve residents' education to prepare them to recognize and address medical errors.

KW - Counting medical errors

KW - Medical error

KW - Medical error acknowledgement

KW - Medical mistake

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=22144486301&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=22144486301&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0098.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0098.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 15963161

AN - SCOPUS:22144486301

VL - 20

SP - 404

EP - 409

JO - Journal of General Internal Medicine

JF - Journal of General Internal Medicine

SN - 0884-8734

IS - 5

ER -