Study | Author(s) | Year of publication | Focus/Purpose | Population | Setting | Method of survey | Personal experience only or family included | Number of responses | Response rate | Types of errors reported | Number of reports | Number of incidents reported per person | Timeline of reporters recall | Where/how found |
Views of Practicing Physicians and the Public on Medical Errors.6 | Blendon RJ, DesRoches CM, Brodie M, et al. | 2002 | Physician & public views about the medical error statistics | General US | Broad | Random digit dialling. Open-ended & closed-ended questions. | Personal & family members’ | 1206 | 67% | Reporter classified: health consequences as serious (24%), minor (13%), none (5%). | 507 reports of errors in own care or with family member. | 0.4/person | Entire lifetime | Reference list “Perceptions of preventable medical errors in Alberta” Northcott H, et al 200714 |
Developing a comprehensive electronic adverse event reporting system in an academic health centre.7 | Kivlahan C, Sangster W, Nelson K, et al. | 2002 | Web-based survey for staff, patients, family, & visitors | Specific University of Missouri Health Care discharged patients | Hospital | Web-based anonymous survey at stand-alone stations in hospital or online for access from home. Open-ended questions. | Personal | 345 | Could not be calculated | Reporter classified: compliments, complaints, or suggestions. | 345 comments. | Not reported | Recent experience | Database MEDLINE |
Patient-reports of preventable problems and harms in primary health care.8 | Kuzel AJ, Woolf SH, Gilchrist VJ, et al. | 2004 | Patients identifying harmful preventable incidents | General Virginia & Ohio rural, suburban, & urban public | Primary Care | Random digit dialling to recruit. In person interview. $50 incentive to participate in interview. Open-ended, prompted narratives. | Personal | 38 | Could not be calculated | Clinician classified: access breakdown (28.5%), communication breakdown (7.7%), relationship breakdown (37.1%), technical error (24.4%), inefficiency of care (2.3%). Harm (76.9%) classified into psychological & physical. | 221 reported problematic incident. | 5.8/person | Entire lifetime | Database MEDLINE |
Patient reports of undesirable events during hospitalization.9 | Agoritsas T, Bovier PA, Perneger TV. | 2005 | Events patients identify; comparing overall satisfaction rating with problems encountered | Specific Geneva University Hospital discharged patients | Hospital | Written questionnaire mailed out as 2001 routine patient opinion survey. Closed-ended questions. | Personal | 1433 | 67% | Reporter classified: medical complications (23.5%), interpersonal problems (29.9%), incidents related to the health care process (23.5%). | 1814 total undesirable events; 725 (50.6%) reported at least 1 event. | 1.3/person | Most recent hospitalisation | Database PubMed |
What can hospitalized patients tell us about adverse events? Learning from patient-reported incident?3 | Weingart SN, Pagovich O, Sands DZ, et al. | 2005 | Inpatients identify adverse events | Specific: Boston teaching hospital medical unit- inpatients | Hospital | In-person interviews (open-ended questions). Follow-up phone interviews 10 days after discharge (open-ended questions). | Personal | 528 | 86% | Clinician classified: adverse events (7.5%), near misses (3.5%), & medical errors with minimal risk of harm (9.2%). Positive/favourable assessments of care (24.2%). Service quality problems (55.8%). | 310 distinct incident reports received. 112 patients reported at least 1 incident. | 1.4/person | Most recent hospitalisation | Database MEDLINE |
Reports of Preventable Medical Errors from the Alberta Patient Safety Survey 2004.10 | Vanderheyden LC, Northcott HC, Adair CE, et al. | 2005 | Survey to assess perceptions & personal experience with preventable medical errors | General Alberta | Broad | Random digit-dialling for households. Computerised-assisted phone interviewing system. Closed-ended & open-ended questions, narratives. | Personal & household members | 1500 | 55% | Researcher classified: clinical performance (23.7%), medication (22.8%), diagnosis (22.4%), communication (13.5%), other (17.6%, patient management, time, surgery, therapy, practitioner attitude or disposition, no improvement in condition, inefficiency with time or resources, & lack of procedures). | 559 total reports of personal or family member experiencing a preventable medical error. | 0.4/person | Entire life in Alberta | Database PubMed |
Consumer perceptions of safety in hospitals.11 | Evans SM, Berry JG, Smith BJ, et al. | 2006 | Safety of Australian hospitals | General Adelaide, South Australia & rural centres with population exceeding 1000 | Hospital | In-person interview. Closed-ended questions. | Personal & household members | 2884 representing 8068 persons | 78% | Reporter classified: severity (really serious (59.7%), a little serious, notserious), prolonged hospitalisation (48.5%). | 170 respondents reported 240 adverse events amongst household members. | 0.1/person | In last 5 years | Database PubMed |
Learning from different lenses: reports of medical errors in primary care by clinicians, staff, and patients.12 | Phillips RL, Dovey SM, Graham D, et al. | 2006 | To compare reports of medical errors made by family doctors, office staff, & patients | Specific 10 American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network family clinics | Primary Care | Anonymous reports via web site, paper forms, & voice-activated phone system. Closed-ended & open-ended questions, narratives. | Personal | 126 | Could not be calculated | Reporter classified: Process errors, & knowledge & skill errors including extended waiting (33.3%), errors in past (16.7%), mistaken identity (11.1%), unnecessary blood draw (5.6%), prescription (5.6%), other (27.1%). | 126 patients reported 18 errors (10 mail; 7 web; 1 phone) | 0.1/person | Recent primary care visit | Reference list “Rural community members’ perception of harm from medical mistakes: A High Plains Research Network study” Rebecca VanVorst 200713 |
Rural community members’ perception of harm from medical mistakes: A High Plains Research Network study.13 | Van Vorst RF, Araya-Guerra R, Felzien M, et al. | 2007 | To learn about rural community members’ definitions & types of harm from medical mistakes | General 4 rural north-eastern Colorado communities | Broad | Surveys inserted in 4 local newspapers. Community advisory council members distributed 25 additional surveys. Open-ended questions. | Personal & family members | 286 | 3% | Clinician classified: obvious medical mistakes (30%), possible mistakes (29%), problems or unanticipated outcomes (41%). Obvious mistakes classified further: clinical event (62%), communication errors (23%), & medication errors (23%). | Total 180 incidents. 172 reports of at least one medical mistake involving respondent or family member. | 0.6/person | Entire life-time | Database PubMed |
Perceptions of preventable medical errors in Alberta, Canada.14 | Northcott H, Vanderheyden L, Northcott J, et al. | 2007 | Comparing patients who report personal or family experience of preventable medical errors with the perceptions of patients who did not report first-hand experience | General Alberta | Broad | Random digit-dialling. Computerised-assisted phone interviewing system. Closed-ended & open-ended questions, narratives. | Personal & household members | 1500 | 55% | Researcher classified: clinical performance (23.7%), medication (22.8%), diagnosis (22.4%), communication (13.5%), other (17.6%, including patient management, time, surgery, therapy, practitioner attitude or disposition, no improvement in condition, inefficiency with time or resources, & lack of procedures). | 559 total reports. 37.3% of patients reported that they or a family member had experienced a preventable medical error. 32% reported error in personal care, 56% in a family member's care, & 12% in both. | 0.4/person | Entire life in Alberta | Database MEDLINE |
Patient-reported safety and quality of care in outpatient oncology.15 | Weingart SN, Price J, Duncombe D, et al. | 2007 | Oncology patients observe & report unsafe experiences | Specific Boston cancer centre inpatients | Oncology | Interviewed in-person by patient-advocates. Open-ended questions. | Personal | 193 | 96% | Reporter classified: adverse events (1.6%), close calls (3.3%), errors without risk or ham (11.6%), service quality incidents (83.5%). | 138 comments about safety or general care. Only coded 121 reports affecting 83 patients. | 1.4/person | Recent treatment at cancer centre | Database PubMed |
Patients use an internet technology to report when things go wrong.16 | Wasson JH, MacKenzie TA, Hall M. | 2007 | Evaluating accuracy of patient reported medical errors & an electronic reporting survey | General US | Broad | Health survey online. Customised health & self-management resources as incentive. Open-ended & closed-ended questions. | Personal & family members | 44,860 | Not reported | Lawyer classified: nuisance (91%) & potential compensable injury (9%). | 610 reports of health-related adverse event (2979 reports of harm, hurt, or injury to themselves or a family member over lifetime). | Less than 0.1/person | Previous year | Database PubMed |
“Against the silence”: Development and first results of a patient survey to assess experiences of safety-related events in hospital.17 | Schwappach DLB. | 2008 | Develop & pilot test patient safety survey for inpatients | Specific 2 Swiss hospital general surgical & internal medicine discharged patients | Hospital | In-patient or discharged written questionnaire (closed-ended questions). Follow-up phone interview (open-ended questions). | Personal | 125- with 18 follow up interviews | 31% | Researcher classified: process of care (39.8%), medication (30.5%), communication (25%), fall (4.6%). Definitive (73.4%) or uncertain (26.6%) | 128 reports. | 1.0/person | Recent hospital stay | Database PubMed |
Can Patient Safety Be Measured by Surveys of Patient Experiences?18 | Solberg LI, Asche SE, Averbeck BM,et al. | 2008 | To determine whether patient reports of medical errors can be used to measure safety | Large multi-speciality medical group located in Minneapolis-St. Paul | Specialty and Primary Care | Mailed questionnaire. Open ended. | Personal & family | 1,998 | 65% | Reporter classified: wrong diagnosis, wrong treatment, wrong prescription, wrong procedure, or other. Clinician classified: medical error (10%), non-medical error (9%), behaviour / communication (20%), misunderstanding (45%), inadequate information (13%), unable to determine (3%) | 247 reports | 12.4/family | Previous year | Colleague recommendation |
Comparing Patient-Reported Hospital Adverse Events with Medical Record Review: Do Patients Know Something That Hospitals Do Not?19 | Weissman JS, Schneider EC, Weingart SN, et al. | 2008 | To compare adverse events reported in postdischarge patient interviews with adverse events detected by medical record review. | Massachusetts Hospitals | Hospital | Telephone interview. Combination open and closed ended questions. | Personal | 2582 | 62% | Clinician classified: severity (life-threatening (1%), serious (13%), clinically significant (63%), or trivial or insignificant (23%)) and preventability (definitely (1%), probably (29%), probably not (68%), or definitely not (3%)) | 253 reports | 0.3 events / person | April 1 – October 1, 2008 | Colleague recommendation |
Medication safety messages for patients via the web portal: The MedCheck intervention.20 | Weingart SN, Hamrick HE, Tutkus S. | 2008 | To determine whether electronic medication safety messages can improve communication about medications and identify ADEs. | Specific: Three adult sites | Primary care | Electronic messages delivered via web portal. Open ended. | Personal | 1821 | 12% | Reporter classified: problems filling prescriptions (48%), problems with drug effectiveness (12%), and medication symptoms (10%). | 17 | 0.06 events / person | April 1, 2001 - June 10, 2002 | Colleague recommendation |
Adverse Drug Events in Ambulatory Care21 | Gandhi TK, Weingart SN, Borus J, et al. | 2003 | To determine the rates, types, severity, and preventability of adverse drug events among outpatients and to identify preventive strategies. | Specific: Four adult practices | Primary care | Telephone interview. Combination open and closed ended questions. | Personal | 661 | 55% | Clinician classified: Serious (13%), ameliorable (28%), preventable (11%). Of ameliorable events, 63% due to physician's failure to respond to medication-related symptoms, and 37% due to patient's failure to inform physician. | 181 | 0.27 events/person | September 1999 – March 2000 | Colleague recommendation |