What do family physicians consider an error? A comparison of definitions and physician perception

Elder, Nancy C.; Pallerla, Harini; Regan, Saundra

doi:10.1186/1471-2296-7-73

Cited by 42 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 50 publications

(60 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In a survey, 17 definitions were found for error and 14 for ‘adverse event’ [1]. Another review found 24 definitions for error, with a range of opinions as to what constitutes an error [2]. A need was thus identified for a comprehensive classification, populated by concepts with agreed definitions [3, 4], each labelled by ‘preferred terms’.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards an International Classification for Patient Safety: key concepts and terms

Runciman

Hibbert

Thomson

et al. 2009

International Journal for Quality in Health Care

477

353

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundUnderstanding the patient safety literature has been compromised by the inconsistent use of language.ObjectivesTo identify key concepts of relevance to the International Patient Safety Classification (ICPS) proposed by the World Alliance For Patient Safety of the World Health Organization (WHO), and agree on definitions and preferred terms.MethodsSix principles were agreed upon—that the concepts and terms should: be applicable across the full spectrum of healthcare; be consistent with concepts from other WHO Classifications; have meanings as close as possible to those in colloquial use; convey the appropriate meanings with respect to patient safety; be brief and clear, without unnecessary or redundant qualifiers; be fit-for-purpose for the ICPS.ResultsDefinitions and preferred terms were agreed for 48 concepts of relevance to the ICPS; these were described and the relationships between them and the ICPS were outlined.ConclusionsThe consistent use of key concepts, definitions and preferred terms should pave the way for better understanding, for comparisons between facilities and jurisdictions, and for trends to be tracked over time. Changes and improvements, translation into other languages and alignment with other sets of patient safety definitions will be necessary. This work represents the start of an ongoing process of progressively improving a common international understanding of terms and concepts relevant to patient safety.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards an International Classification for Patient Safety: key concepts and terms

Runciman

Hibbert

Thomson

et al. 2009

International Journal for Quality in Health Care

477

353

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Elder et al 38 reviewed the literature for definitions of error. They then devised scenarios representative of preventable problems experienced by family physicians and surveyed family physicians as to whether an error or mistake had occurred according to Reason's definition of error 39.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety learning system development--incident reporting component for family practice

O’Beirne

Sterling

Reid

et al. 2010

Quality and Safety in Health Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…17 To promote a common understanding and ease the comparison of international datasets from different reporting systems, WHO Patient Safety commissioned work to develop a framework for an International Classification for Patient Safety (ICPS) (figure 2). 18 19…”

Section: Adverse Incident Reportingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making existing technology safer in healthcare

Newton

Mytton²,

Aggarwal

et al. 2010

Quality and Safety in Health Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Technology, equipment and medical devices are vital for effective healthcare throughout the world but are associated with risks. These risks include device failure, inappropriate use, insufficient user-training and inadequate inspection and maintenance. Further risks within the developing world include challenging conditions of temperature and humidity, poor infrastructure, poorly trained service providers, limited resources and supervision, and inappropriately complex equipment being supplied without backup training for its use or maintenance. Methods This document is the product of an expert working group established by WHO Patient Safety to define the measures being taken to reduce these risks. It considers how the provision of safer technology services worldwide is being enhanced in three ways: through non-punitive and open reporting systems of technology-related adverse events and near-misses, with classification and investigation; through healthcare quality assessment, accreditation and certification; and by the investigation of how appropriate design and an understanding of the conditions of use and associated human factors can improve patient safety. Results and discussion Many aspects of these steps remain aspirational for developing countries, where highly disparate needs and a vast range of technologyrelated problems exist. Here, much greater emphasis must be placed on failsafe, durable and user-friendly designdexamples of which are described.

show abstract

What do family physicians consider an error? A comparison of definitions and physician perception

Cited by 42 publications

References 50 publications

Towards an International Classification for Patient Safety: key concepts and terms

Towards an International Classification for Patient Safety: key concepts and terms

Safety learning system development--incident reporting component for family practice

Making existing technology safer in healthcare

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About