Loading…
Debunking the myth that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication
Context Many articles, book chapters and presentations begin with a declaration that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication. However, this statement may not be supported by the research reported in the literature. Objectives The purpose of this systematic review is to identif...
Saved in:
Published in: | Medical education 2020-01, Vol.54 (1), p.74-81 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3931-52f29ec5e6a11108e4d76df462ea7452347803a2283dedd16b49341812eb11ad3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3931-52f29ec5e6a11108e4d76df462ea7452347803a2283dedd16b49341812eb11ad3 |
container_end_page | 81 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 74 |
container_title | Medical education |
container_volume | 54 |
creator | Clapper, Timothy C Ching, Kevin |
description | Context
Many articles, book chapters and presentations begin with a declaration that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication. However, this statement may not be supported by the research reported in the literature.
Objectives
The purpose of this systematic review is to identify where errors are reported in the research literature.
Methods
A systematised review was conducted of research articles over the last 20 years (1998‐2018) indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) using term combinations: medical errors, research and communication. Inclusion was based on reported generalised primary research of medical error and the reported causes.
Results
This systematised review resulted in 2881 research articles, which produced 42 that met the inclusion criteria. Although there was some overlap, three categories of errors were dominant in this research: errors of commission (20 articles; 47.6%), errors of omission (six articles; 14.2%) and errors through communication (four articles; 9.5%). There were 12 (28.5%) articles in which all three categories together significantly contributed to error. Of these 12 articles, errors of commission or omission were dominant in nine articles (21.4%) and errors of communication were prevalent in only three articles (7%).
Conclusions
The assertion that the majority of medical errors can be attributed to miscommunication is not supported by this systematic review. Overwhelmingly, most reported errors are attributed to errors of omission or commission. Intentionally or unintentionally providing misinformation may mislead patient safety initiatives, and research and funding agency priorities.
The majority of medical errors can be attributed to miscommunication … or not? Existing research suggests the contrary, that most reported errors may be better attributed to errors of omission and/or commission. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/medu.13821 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2288713189</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2288713189</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3931-52f29ec5e6a11108e4d76df462ea7452347803a2283dedd16b49341812eb11ad3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1PxCAQhonR6Ppx8QcYEi_GpMoAbenR-J1ovLheCW2n2rUtCjRm_72sVQ8e5DIweXgHHkL2gZ1AXKc91uMJCMVhjcxAZGnCCy7WyYwJphIGwLbItvcLxlieSrVJtgSkrOB5PiNPF1iOw2s7PNPwgrRfhpe4MWE6mYV1bVhS29A4pK1MR9E56zw1DqkJwbXlGLCmwdLK9v04RCa0dtglG43pPO591x0yv7p8PL9J7h6ub8_P7pJKFAKSlDe8wCrFzMSPMIWyzrO6kRlHk8uUC5krJgznStRY15CVshASFHAsAUwtdsjRlPvm7PuIPui-9RV2nRnQjl7HmyoHAaqI6OEfdGFHN8TXaS6iC5ZLLiN1PFGVs947bPSba3vjlhqYXtnWK9v6y3aED74jxzK2f9EfvRGACfhoO1z-E6XvLy_mU-gnWrSI-Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2327707424</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Debunking the myth that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication</title><source>Wiley</source><creator>Clapper, Timothy C ; Ching, Kevin</creator><creatorcontrib>Clapper, Timothy C ; Ching, Kevin</creatorcontrib><description>Context
Many articles, book chapters and presentations begin with a declaration that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication. However, this statement may not be supported by the research reported in the literature.
Objectives
The purpose of this systematic review is to identify where errors are reported in the research literature.
Methods
A systematised review was conducted of research articles over the last 20 years (1998‐2018) indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) using term combinations: medical errors, research and communication. Inclusion was based on reported generalised primary research of medical error and the reported causes.
Results
This systematised review resulted in 2881 research articles, which produced 42 that met the inclusion criteria. Although there was some overlap, three categories of errors were dominant in this research: errors of commission (20 articles; 47.6%), errors of omission (six articles; 14.2%) and errors through communication (four articles; 9.5%). There were 12 (28.5%) articles in which all three categories together significantly contributed to error. Of these 12 articles, errors of commission or omission were dominant in nine articles (21.4%) and errors of communication were prevalent in only three articles (7%).
Conclusions
The assertion that the majority of medical errors can be attributed to miscommunication is not supported by this systematic review. Overwhelmingly, most reported errors are attributed to errors of omission or commission. Intentionally or unintentionally providing misinformation may mislead patient safety initiatives, and research and funding agency priorities.
The majority of medical errors can be attributed to miscommunication … or not? Existing research suggests the contrary, that most reported errors may be better attributed to errors of omission and/or commission.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0308-0110</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2923</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/medu.13821</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31509277</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Communication ; Medical education ; Medical errors ; Patient safety ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>Medical education, 2020-01, Vol.54 (1), p.74-81</ispartof><rights>2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and The Association for the Study of Medical Education</rights><rights>2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and The Association for the Study of Medical Education.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and The Association for the Study of Medical Education</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3931-52f29ec5e6a11108e4d76df462ea7452347803a2283dedd16b49341812eb11ad3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3931-52f29ec5e6a11108e4d76df462ea7452347803a2283dedd16b49341812eb11ad3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1988-6505</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31509277$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Clapper, Timothy C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ching, Kevin</creatorcontrib><title>Debunking the myth that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication</title><title>Medical education</title><addtitle>Med Educ</addtitle><description>Context
Many articles, book chapters and presentations begin with a declaration that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication. However, this statement may not be supported by the research reported in the literature.
Objectives
The purpose of this systematic review is to identify where errors are reported in the research literature.
Methods
A systematised review was conducted of research articles over the last 20 years (1998‐2018) indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) using term combinations: medical errors, research and communication. Inclusion was based on reported generalised primary research of medical error and the reported causes.
Results
This systematised review resulted in 2881 research articles, which produced 42 that met the inclusion criteria. Although there was some overlap, three categories of errors were dominant in this research: errors of commission (20 articles; 47.6%), errors of omission (six articles; 14.2%) and errors through communication (four articles; 9.5%). There were 12 (28.5%) articles in which all three categories together significantly contributed to error. Of these 12 articles, errors of commission or omission were dominant in nine articles (21.4%) and errors of communication were prevalent in only three articles (7%).
Conclusions
The assertion that the majority of medical errors can be attributed to miscommunication is not supported by this systematic review. Overwhelmingly, most reported errors are attributed to errors of omission or commission. Intentionally or unintentionally providing misinformation may mislead patient safety initiatives, and research and funding agency priorities.
The majority of medical errors can be attributed to miscommunication … or not? Existing research suggests the contrary, that most reported errors may be better attributed to errors of omission and/or commission.</description><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Medical education</subject><subject>Medical errors</subject><subject>Patient safety</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>0308-0110</issn><issn>1365-2923</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1PxCAQhonR6Ppx8QcYEi_GpMoAbenR-J1ovLheCW2n2rUtCjRm_72sVQ8e5DIweXgHHkL2gZ1AXKc91uMJCMVhjcxAZGnCCy7WyYwJphIGwLbItvcLxlieSrVJtgSkrOB5PiNPF1iOw2s7PNPwgrRfhpe4MWE6mYV1bVhS29A4pK1MR9E56zw1DqkJwbXlGLCmwdLK9v04RCa0dtglG43pPO591x0yv7p8PL9J7h6ub8_P7pJKFAKSlDe8wCrFzMSPMIWyzrO6kRlHk8uUC5krJgznStRY15CVshASFHAsAUwtdsjRlPvm7PuIPui-9RV2nRnQjl7HmyoHAaqI6OEfdGFHN8TXaS6iC5ZLLiN1PFGVs947bPSba3vjlhqYXtnWK9v6y3aED74jxzK2f9EfvRGACfhoO1z-E6XvLy_mU-gnWrSI-Q</recordid><startdate>202001</startdate><enddate>202001</enddate><creator>Clapper, Timothy C</creator><creator>Ching, Kevin</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1988-6505</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202001</creationdate><title>Debunking the myth that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication</title><author>Clapper, Timothy C ; Ching, Kevin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3931-52f29ec5e6a11108e4d76df462ea7452347803a2283dedd16b49341812eb11ad3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Medical education</topic><topic>Medical errors</topic><topic>Patient safety</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Clapper, Timothy C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ching, Kevin</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Medical education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Clapper, Timothy C</au><au>Ching, Kevin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Debunking the myth that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication</atitle><jtitle>Medical education</jtitle><addtitle>Med Educ</addtitle><date>2020-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>54</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>74</spage><epage>81</epage><pages>74-81</pages><issn>0308-0110</issn><eissn>1365-2923</eissn><abstract>Context
Many articles, book chapters and presentations begin with a declaration that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication. However, this statement may not be supported by the research reported in the literature.
Objectives
The purpose of this systematic review is to identify where errors are reported in the research literature.
Methods
A systematised review was conducted of research articles over the last 20 years (1998‐2018) indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) using term combinations: medical errors, research and communication. Inclusion was based on reported generalised primary research of medical error and the reported causes.
Results
This systematised review resulted in 2881 research articles, which produced 42 that met the inclusion criteria. Although there was some overlap, three categories of errors were dominant in this research: errors of commission (20 articles; 47.6%), errors of omission (six articles; 14.2%) and errors through communication (four articles; 9.5%). There were 12 (28.5%) articles in which all three categories together significantly contributed to error. Of these 12 articles, errors of commission or omission were dominant in nine articles (21.4%) and errors of communication were prevalent in only three articles (7%).
Conclusions
The assertion that the majority of medical errors can be attributed to miscommunication is not supported by this systematic review. Overwhelmingly, most reported errors are attributed to errors of omission or commission. Intentionally or unintentionally providing misinformation may mislead patient safety initiatives, and research and funding agency priorities.
The majority of medical errors can be attributed to miscommunication … or not? Existing research suggests the contrary, that most reported errors may be better attributed to errors of omission and/or commission.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>31509277</pmid><doi>10.1111/medu.13821</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1988-6505</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0308-0110 |
ispartof | Medical education, 2020-01, Vol.54 (1), p.74-81 |
issn | 0308-0110 1365-2923 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2288713189 |
source | Wiley |
subjects | Communication Medical education Medical errors Patient safety Systematic review |
title | Debunking the myth that the majority of medical errors are attributed to communication |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T12%3A43%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Debunking%20the%20myth%20that%20the%20majority%20of%20medical%20errors%20are%20attributed%20to%20communication&rft.jtitle=Medical%20education&rft.au=Clapper,%20Timothy%20C&rft.date=2020-01&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=74&rft.epage=81&rft.pages=74-81&rft.issn=0308-0110&rft.eissn=1365-2923&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/medu.13821&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2288713189%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3931-52f29ec5e6a11108e4d76df462ea7452347803a2283dedd16b49341812eb11ad3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2327707424&rft_id=info:pmid/31509277&rfr_iscdi=true |