rss
BMJ Qual Saf doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000213
  • Systematic review

Can patients report patient safety incidents in a hospital setting? A systematic review

  1. Gerry Armitage2
  1. 1Yorkshire Quality and Safety Research Group, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford, UK
  2. 2School of Health, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Jane Ward, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Temple Bank House, Bradford Royal Infirmary, Duckworth Lane, Bradford BD9 6RJ, UK; jane.ward{at}bradfordhospitals.nhs.uk
  1. Contributors JW carried out the searches and led the writing of the manuscript. GA assisted with the appraisal of the papers included in the review and edited draft versions of the manuscript.

  • Accepted 27 March 2012
  • Published Online First 5 May 2012

Abstract

Introduction Patients are increasingly being thought of as central to patient safety. A small but growing body of work suggests that patients may have a role in reporting patient safety problems within a hospital setting. This review considers this disparate body of work, aiming to establish a collective view on hospital-based patient reporting.

Study objectives This review asks: (a) What can patients report? (b) In what settings can they report? (c) At what times have patients been asked to report? (d) How have patients been asked to report?

Method 5 databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, (Kings Fund) HMIC and PsycINFO) were searched for published literature on patient reporting of patient safety ‘problems’ (a number of search terms were utilised) within a hospital setting. In addition, reference lists of all included papers were checked for relevant literature.

Results 13 papers were included within this review. All included papers were quality assessed using a framework for comparing both qualitative and quantitative designs, and reviewed in line with the study objectives.

Discussion Patients are clearly in a position to report on patient safety, but included papers varied considerably in focus, design and analysis, with all papers lacking a theoretical underpinning. In all papers, reports were actively solicited from patients, with no evidence currently supporting spontaneous reporting. The impact of timing upon accuracy of information has yet to be established, and many vulnerable patients are not currently being included in patient reporting studies, potentially introducing bias and underestimating the scale of patient reporting. The future of patient reporting may well be as part of an ‘error detection jigsaw’ used alongside other methods as part of a quality improvement toolkit.

Footnotes

  • Funding This review was undertaken as part of a wider programme of research kindly commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under the Health Services Research programme. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data sharing statement We would be happy to share the quality appraisal of included papers with interested readers.

Free sample

This recent issue is free to all users to allow everyone the opportunity to see the full scope and typical content of BMJ Quality & Safety.
View free sample issue >>

Email alerts

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

 

Navigate This Article