BackgroundIncident reporting systems (IRS) are used to identify medical errors in order to learn from mistakes and improve patient safety in hospitals. However, IRS contain only a small fraction of occurring incidents. A more comprehensive overview of medical error in hospitals may be obtained by combining information from multiple sources. The WHO has developed the International Classification for Patient Safety (ICPS) in order to enable comparison of incident reports from different sources and institutions.MethodsThe aim of this paper was to provide a more comprehensive overview of medical error in hospitals using a combination of different information sources. Incident reports collected from IRS, patient complaints and retrospective chart review in an academic acute care hospital were classified using the ICPS. The main outcome measures were distribution of incidents over the thirteen categories of the ICPS classifier “Incident type”, described as odds ratios (OR) and proportional similarity indices (PSI).ResultsA total of 1012 incidents resulted in 1282 classified items. Large differences between data from IRS and patient complaints (PSI = 0.32) and from IRS and retrospective chart review (PSI = 0.31) were mainly attributable to behaviour (OR = 6.08), clinical administration (OR = 5.14), clinical process (OR = 6.73) and resources (OR = 2.06).ConclusionsIRS do not capture all incidents in hospitals and should be combined with complementary information about diagnostic error and delayed treatment from patient complaints and retrospective chart review. Since incidents that are not recorded in IRS do not lead to remedial and preventive action in response to IRS reports, healthcare centres that have access to different incident detection methods should harness information from all sources to improve patient safety.
Evidence that medical error can cause harm to patients has raised the attention of the health care community towards patient safety and influenced how and what medical students learn about it. Patient safety is best taught when students are participating in clinical practice where they actually encounter patients at risk. This type of learning is referred to as workplace learning, a complex system in which various factors influence what is being learned and how. A theory that can highlight potential difficulties in this complex learning system about patient safety is activity theory. Thirty-four final year undergraduate medical students participated in four focus groups about their experiences concerning patient safety. Using activity theory as analytical framework, we performed constant comparative thematic analysis of the focus group transcripts to identify important themes. We found eight general themes relating to two activities: learning to be a doctor and delivering safe patient care. Simultaneous occurrence of these two activities can cause contradictions. Our results illustrate the complexity of learning about patient safety at the workplace. Students encounter contradictions when learning about patient safety, especially during a transitional phase of their training. These contradictions create potential learning opportunities which should be used in education about patient safety. Insight into the complexities of patient safety is essential to improve education in this important area of medicine.
Learning from error is not just an individual endeavour. Organisations also learn from error. Hospitals provide many learning opportunities, which can be formal or informal. Informal learning from error in hospitals has not been researched in much depth so this narrative review focuses on five learning opportunities: morbidity and mortality conferences, incident reporting systems, patient claims and complaints, chart review and prospective risk analysis. For each of them we describe: (1) what can be learnt, categorised according to the seven CanMEDS competencies; (2) how it is possible to learn from them, analysed against a model of informal and incidental learning; and (3) how this learning can be enhanced. All CanMEDS competencies could be enhanced, but there was a particular focus on the roles of medical expert and manager. Informal learning occurred mostly through reflection and action and was often linked to the learning of others. Most important to enhance informal learning from these learning opportunities was the realisation of a climate of collaboration and trust. Possible new directions for future research on informal learning from error in hospitals might focus on ways to measure informal learning and the balance between formal and informal learning. Finally, 12 recommendations about how hospitals could enhance informal learning within their organisation are given.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.