Cargando…

Does the perception of severity of medical error differ between varying levels of clinical seniority?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Francis Report called for a more “open culture” to empower health care staff to report medical errors. However, there are differing opinions amongst doctors as to what constitutes a medical error, and no previous study has investigated whether the perception of medical er...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Khan, Iqbal, Arsanious, Meret
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6007198/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29942171
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S146474
_version_ 1783332989981163520
author Khan, Iqbal
Arsanious, Meret
author_facet Khan, Iqbal
Arsanious, Meret
author_sort Khan, Iqbal
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Francis Report called for a more “open culture” to empower health care staff to report medical errors. However, there are differing opinions amongst doctors as to what constitutes a medical error, and no previous study has investigated whether the perception of medical errors varies with clinical seniority. METHODS: A prospective study comprising medical students (s), junior doctors (jd), and consultants (c) from one Deanery was conducted, where participants were anonymously assessed on their perceptions of error in eight different hypothetical scenarios using a numerical scale (1–10). Scenarios were reviewed for face validity and pilot tested before implementation. A statistician prospectively determined the number of participants to ensure the study was sufficiently powerful. Scenario ratings were analyzed using non-parametric statistical tests and free-text answers were analyzed by immersion and crystallization. RESULTS: Two hundred thirteen participants were recruited with near equal distribution in gender (51%:49%, F:M) and clinical seniority (36%:34%:30%, s:jd:c, respectively). Significant difference was shown in three out of the eight scenarios between the students and the consultants, and in one of those three between junior doctors and students. Qualitative analysis found various factors that contribute to participants’ decision regarding error severity. Students and junior doctors commented on potential consequences in greater detail, but consultants showed greater awareness of the latent factors contributing to error. CONCLUSION: Heterogeneity in answers was seen within each of the cohorts. The most influential factors were scenario outcome and potential consequences. Latent factors, such as error circumstances and participant’s empathy, also contributed to response. There were significant differences in the scores between medical students and consultants in some scenarios which may be related to clinical experience. The heterogeneity of answers suggests there is scope for improvement in medical error education.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6007198
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60071982018-06-25 Does the perception of severity of medical error differ between varying levels of clinical seniority? Khan, Iqbal Arsanious, Meret Adv Med Educ Pract Original Research BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Francis Report called for a more “open culture” to empower health care staff to report medical errors. However, there are differing opinions amongst doctors as to what constitutes a medical error, and no previous study has investigated whether the perception of medical errors varies with clinical seniority. METHODS: A prospective study comprising medical students (s), junior doctors (jd), and consultants (c) from one Deanery was conducted, where participants were anonymously assessed on their perceptions of error in eight different hypothetical scenarios using a numerical scale (1–10). Scenarios were reviewed for face validity and pilot tested before implementation. A statistician prospectively determined the number of participants to ensure the study was sufficiently powerful. Scenario ratings were analyzed using non-parametric statistical tests and free-text answers were analyzed by immersion and crystallization. RESULTS: Two hundred thirteen participants were recruited with near equal distribution in gender (51%:49%, F:M) and clinical seniority (36%:34%:30%, s:jd:c, respectively). Significant difference was shown in three out of the eight scenarios between the students and the consultants, and in one of those three between junior doctors and students. Qualitative analysis found various factors that contribute to participants’ decision regarding error severity. Students and junior doctors commented on potential consequences in greater detail, but consultants showed greater awareness of the latent factors contributing to error. CONCLUSION: Heterogeneity in answers was seen within each of the cohorts. The most influential factors were scenario outcome and potential consequences. Latent factors, such as error circumstances and participant’s empathy, also contributed to response. There were significant differences in the scores between medical students and consultants in some scenarios which may be related to clinical experience. The heterogeneity of answers suggests there is scope for improvement in medical error education. Dove Medical Press 2018-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6007198/ /pubmed/29942171 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S146474 Text en © 2018 Khan and Arsanious. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Khan, Iqbal
Arsanious, Meret
Does the perception of severity of medical error differ between varying levels of clinical seniority?
title Does the perception of severity of medical error differ between varying levels of clinical seniority?
title_full Does the perception of severity of medical error differ between varying levels of clinical seniority?
title_fullStr Does the perception of severity of medical error differ between varying levels of clinical seniority?
title_full_unstemmed Does the perception of severity of medical error differ between varying levels of clinical seniority?
title_short Does the perception of severity of medical error differ between varying levels of clinical seniority?
title_sort does the perception of severity of medical error differ between varying levels of clinical seniority?
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6007198/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29942171
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S146474
work_keys_str_mv AT khaniqbal doestheperceptionofseverityofmedicalerrordifferbetweenvaryinglevelsofclinicalseniority
AT arsaniousmeret doestheperceptionofseverityofmedicalerrordifferbetweenvaryinglevelsofclinicalseniority