Article Text

PDF
Doctors’ views of attitudes towards peer medical error
  1. F Asghari1,
  2. A Fotouhi2,
  3. A Jafarian3
  1. 1
    Medical Ethics and History of Medicine Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  2. 2
    Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  3. 3
    Department of General Surgery, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  1. F Asghari, Medical Ethics and History of Medicine Research Center, #21, Shanzdah Azar Street, Tehran, Iran; fasghari{at}tums.ac.ir

Abstract

Background: This study aims at evaluating doctors’ attitudes towards handling medical errors made by their peers.

Materials: This cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted between April and July 2006 and targeted general practitioners attending continuing medical education programmes in Tehran. A total of 474 doctors were approached, 400 of whom completed the questionnaire. The questionnaire contained a clinical vignette with three hypothetical patient outcomes: near-miss, leading to harm, and leading to death. The participants were asked how they would deal with each case. They were also asked how they would prefer their peers to react when they themselves made a medical error.

Results: The most common attitude toward peers’ medical errors was reporting it to the original doctor and asking them to disclose it to the patient (near-miss: 63.0%; 95% CI 58% to 68%; leading to harm: 70.0%; 95% CI 65.4% to 74.6%; and leading to death: 62.5%; 95% CI 57.5% to 67.5%). In most cases, doctors expected their peers to report their medical errors to them (92.7%; 95% CI 89.7% to 93.0). About 67% of the participating doctors had encountered a peer’s medical error in the past 6 months, although 90% of them had received no or very little training in dealing with this issue.

Discussion: The most acceptable approach to dealing with a peer’s medical error is to report it to the responsible doctor and encourage them to disclose it to the patient.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Funding: This study was funded by the Tehran University of Medical Sciences; contract number 132/11770, dated 18 March 2006.

  • Competing interests: None.

  • Ethics approval: The research ethics committee of Tehran University of Medical Sciences reviewed and approved the study protocol.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.