Study examines how doctors discuss medical errors

October 2, 2008

We can learn from our mistakes, but how willing are we to talk about them? And what happens when those making mistakes are physicians, who are often expected to be infallible?

A new University of Iowa study shows that most general practice doctors in teaching hospitals are willing to discuss their own patient care errors with colleagues, but about one in four do not. At the same time, nearly nine of 10 doctors said that if they wanted to talk about a mistake, they knew a colleague who would be a supportive listener. The findings are reported in the Oct. 1 issue of the Journal of Medical Ethics.

The results suggest that it is important to ensure that learning occurs not just in the person who made the mistake but also among their peers, said the study's lead author, Lauris Kaldjian, M.D., Ph.D., associate professor of internal medicine at the University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine.

"Discussing medical errors can be a form of professional learning for doctors. Mistakes should be considered shared commodities and used for all they're worth," said Kaldjian, who also is director of the college's Program in Bioethics and Humanities. "The findings also point to some challenges for physicians seeking emotional support after making an error."

The study results were based on surveys of 338 faculty and resident physicians at teaching hospitals in the United States. Previously published findings by Kaldjian and colleagues, based on the same data set, showed that doctors' actual communication of medical errors to hospitals and patients seems to occur less than it should when compared to physicians' positive attitudes about communicating such errors.

The two earlier studies also found that the more serious the outcome or harm from a hypothetical error, the more likely a doctor said they would communicate it to patients or hospitals. Similarly, the current study used hypothetical scenarios to reveal the likelihood of doctors discussing an error that results in no harm at 77 percent, minor harm at 87 percent, and major harm at 94 percent.

Kaldjian pointed out there is much value in sharing all errors. "Sometimes you make a mistake and nothing happens. Other times, something bad happens," he said. "But in both cases, we need to focus on the mistake because near-misses -- where no harm was done -- are also valuable learning tools."

The most harmful types of errors trigger automatic institutional reviews. However, other errors may not. "Along with helping improve patient care, discussing both types of medical errors can provide important opportunities for learning and emotional support for physicians," Kaldjian said. "However, the formal settings in which shared learning takes place are unlikely to be optimal for providing the individual support needed by the physician who made the mistake.

"Physicians can go through a lot of turmoil when they make a mistake, even if it hasn't caused serious harm to a patient. "While there are some formal group settings in the profession for learning from mistakes, emotional support may require the privacy and reassurance that are found in one-on-one conversations with trusted colleagues," he added.

More than half of the physicians in the study (57 percent) said they had tried at least once to promote the value of discussing errors by discussing one of their own errors in front of students or physicians in training.

"It's encouraging that physicians try to be role models, especially for medical students and younger physicians, and some hospitals even have peer-support teams to help physicians in the aftermath of an error, though such teams appear to be rare," Kaldjian said.

Kaldjian also noted that doctors who consider themselves their "own worst critic" and do not discuss their errors with others lose out on additional perspectives.

"There can be wisdom and comfort in the words of our colleagues, especially when we have reason to trust their insights," he said. "Medical science also encourages an investigative attitude about errors and can motivate us to be as objective as possible about errors and their circumstances without denying the profound need for emotional support."

Overall, Kaldjian said, increased discussion of errors amongst medical professionals is extremely important for professional learning and emotional support. Such discussions may also help physicians encourage each other to disclose errors to patients as part of patient care and to report them to institutions to improve patient safety.

Source: University of Iowa

Explore further: Lack of trust less of a barrier to clinical trial participation, say minority populations

Related Stories

Lack of trust less of a barrier to clinical trial participation, say minority populations

September 19, 2017
Significantly fewer African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians and non-Hispanic whites say 'lack of trust' is a reason why individuals do not participate in clinical trials, indicating a more favorable perception of this research. ...

Planting design seeds to fill diagnostic holes

August 31, 2017
Design learning and journey maps are all the rage here at Stanford University and in Silicon Valley. So why not apply it to health systems to reduce diagnostic errors?

Peri-op management key in surgical resident malpractice

September 4, 2017
(HealthDay)—The perioperative period appears critical in malpractice cases involving surgical residents, according to a study published online Aug. 30 in JAMA Surgery.

New app replaces ultrasound with smartphone camera to measure heart health

September 5, 2017
Want to know how healthy your heart is? Now there's an app for that.

Women largely unaware of minimally invasive treatment for uterine fibroids

August 29, 2017
U.S. women are largely unaware of uterine fibroid embolization (UFE), a minimally invasive treatment for uterine fibroids that is less painful, preserves the uterus and allows women to get back to their lives sooner than ...

AMA joins brief seeking VA coverage of sex reassignment Sx

September 10, 2017
(HealthDay)—Several health care-related organizations have filed an amicus brief in support of veterans seeking a rule change that would amend or repeal the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) policy of not covering ...

Recommended for you

Drug therapy from lethal bacteria could reduce kidney transplant rejection

August 3, 2017
An experimental treatment derived from a potentially deadly microorganism may provide lifesaving help for kidney transplant patients, according to an international study led by investigators at Cedars-Sinai.

Exploring the potential of human echolocation

June 25, 2017
People who are visually impaired will often use a cane to feel out their surroundings. With training and practice, people can learn to use the pitch, loudness and timbre of echoes from the cane or other sounds to navigate ...

Team eradicates hepatitis C in 10 patients following lifesaving transplants from infected donors

April 30, 2017
Ten patients at Penn Medicine have been cured of the Hepatitis C virus (HCV) following lifesaving kidney transplants from deceased donors who were infected with the disease. The findings point to new strategies for increasing ...

'bench to bedside to bench': Scientists call for closer basic-clinical collaborations

March 24, 2017
In the era of genome sequencing, it's time to update the old "bench-to-bedside" shorthand for how basic research discoveries inform clinical practice, researchers from The Jackson Laboratory (JAX), National Human Genome Research ...

The ethics of tracking athletes' biometric data

January 18, 2017
(Medical Xpress)—Whether it is a FitBit or a heart rate monitor, biometric technologies have become household devices. Professional sports leagues use some of the most technologically advanced biodata tracking systems to ...

Financial ties between researchers and drug industry linked to positive trial results

January 18, 2017
Financial ties between researchers and companies that make the drugs they are studying are independently associated with positive trial results, suggesting bias in the evidence base, concludes a study published by The BMJ ...

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

tkjtkj
5 / 5 (1) Oct 02, 2008
From my own medical practice
observations I conclude that
liklihoods of doctors discussing
personal errors is inversely
proportional to the financial
importance of the practicioner
to the institution in which he/she
is working. Eg, a doctor who
'brings in cases' (that support
the hospital) is much more open
to such discussions than is a
specialist who does not pull in
patients: examples might include
radiologists, pathologists, and
anesthesiologists. Often, these
specialties are seen by
administrators as 'expense-causing'
and not 'income producing'. This
means that circumstances of
financial pressure upon these
physicians in their nogiations of
"in-house medical service contractcs"
can make such docs' discussing
personal errors to be a "financial
weapon" to be used against them
in contract negotiations. If the
practicioner knows he/she 'brings
in the cases (ie, the $$), they
are likely to be much more
forthcoming in discussions of
personal errors.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.