Abstract
BACKGROUND: Attending physicians are well positioned to identify medical errors and understand their consequences. The spectrum of errors that can be detected by attending physicians in the course of their usual practice is currently unknown.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency, types, and consequences of errors that can be detected by attending hospitalist physicians in the care of their patients, and to compare the types of errors first discovered by attending hospitalists to those discovered by other providers.
DESIGN: Prospective identification of errors by attending physicians.
SETTING: Two hundred-bed, academic hospital.
PATIENTS: Five hundred twenty-eight patients admitted to the general medicine service from October 2000 to April 2001.
MEASUREMENTS: Errors, both near misses and adverse events, were identified during the course of routine, clinical care by 2 attending hospitalists. Errors first detected by other health care workers were also recorded.
MAIN RESULTS: Of the 528 patients admitted to the hospitalist service, 10.4% experienced at least 1 error: 6.2% a near miss and 4.2% an adverse event. Although differences did not achieve statistical significance, most of the errors first detected by house staff, nurses, and laboratory technicians were adverse events; most of the errors first detected by the attending hospitalists, pharmacists, and consultants were near misses. Drug errors were the most common type of error overall.
CONCLUSIONS: Attending physicians engaged in routine clinical care can detect a range of errors, and differences may exist in the types of errors detected by various health care providers.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Kohn LT, Corrigan J, Donaldson MS. Institute of Medicine (U.S.) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2000.
Brennan TA, Leape LL, Laird NM, et al. Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients. Results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:370–6.
Leape LL, Brennan TA, Laird N, et al. The nature of adverse events in hospitalized patients. Results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study II. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:377–84.
Thomas EJ, Studdert DM, Burstin HR, et al. Incidence and types of adverse events and negligent care in Utah and Colorado. Med Care. 2000;38:261–71.
Weingart SN, Callanan LD, Ship AN, Aronson MD. A physician-based voluntary reporting system for adverse events and medical errors. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:809–14.
Weingart SN, Ship AN, Aronson MD. Confidential clinician-reported surveillance of adverse events among medical inpatients. J Gen Intern Med.2000;15:470–7.
O’Neil AC, Petersen LA, Cook EF, Bate DW, Lee TH, Brennan TA. Physician reporting compared with medical-record review to identify adverse medical events. Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:370–6.
Joint commission commends proposed legislation for patient safety. Available at: http:\\www.jcaho.org\about+us\news+letters\jcahonline\print\jo_07_02.htm. Accessed June 24, 2003.
Thomas EJ, Lipsitz SR, Studdert DM, Brennan TA. The reliability of medical record review for estimating adverse event rates. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:812–6.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Dr. Chaudhry is a Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholar and is supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chaudhry, S.I., Olofinboba, K.A. & Krumholz, H.M. Detection of errors by attending physicians on a general medicine service. J GEN INTERN MED 18, 595–600 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20919.x
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20919.x