Exploring medical and nursing students' perceptions about a patient safety course: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Educating health professionals on patient safety can potentially reduce healthcare-associated harm. Patient safety courses have been incorporated into medical and nursing curricula in many high-income countries and their impact has been demonstrated in the literature through objective assessments. This study aimed to explore student perceptions about a patient safety course to assess its influence on aspiring health professionals at a personal level as well as to explore differences in areas of focus between medical and nursing students. METHODS: A dedicated patient safety course was introduced for year III medical and year II and IV nursing students at the Aga Khan University (2021-2022). As part of a post-course assessment, 577 participating students (184 medical and 393 nursing) wrote reflections on the course, detailing its influence on them. These free-text responses were thematically analyzed using NVivo. RESULTS: The findings revealed five major themes: acquired skills (clinical, interpersonal), understanding of medical errors (increased awareness, prevention and reduction, responding to errors), personal experiences with patient safety issues, impact of course (changed perceptions, professional integrity, need for similar sessions, importance of the topic) and course feedback (format, preparation for clinical years, suggestions). Students reported a lack of baseline awareness regarding the frequency and consequences of medical errors. After the course, medical students reported a perceptional shift in favor of systems thinking regarding error causality, and nursing students focused on human factors and error prevention. The interactive course format involving scenario-based learning was deemed beneficial in terms of increasing awareness, imparting relevant clinical and interpersonal skills, and changing perspectives on patient safety. CONCLUSIONS: Student perspectives illustrate the benefits of an early introduction of dedicated courses in imparting patient safety education to aspiring health professionals. Students reported a lack of baseline awareness of essential patient safety concepts, highlighting gaps in the existing curricula. This study can help provide an impetus for incorporating patient safety as a core component in medical and nursing curricula nationally and across the region. Additionally, patient safety courses can be tailored to emphasize areas identified as gaps among each professional group, and interprofessional education can be employed for shared learning. The authors further recommend conducting longitudinal studies to assess the long-term impact of such courses.

Molar root canal treatment performed by undergraduate dental students; an observational study of procedural errors and student perception.

BACKGROUND: Molar root canal treatment (RCT) is challenging and requires training and specific skills. Rotary instrumentation (RI) reduces the time needed for instrumentation but may increase the risk of certain procedural errors. The aims of this study were to evaluate the quality of molar RCTs provided by undergraduate students, to compare the prevalence of procedural errors following manual and RI, and to assess the students' self-perceived confidence to perform molar RCT without supervision and their preference for either manual or RI. METHODS: Molar RCTs performed by the final year students were evaluated radiographically according to predefined criteria (Appendix 1). The procedural errors, treatment details, and the students' self-perceived confidence to perform molar RCT and their preference for either manual or RI were recorded. Descriptive statistics were performed, and the Chi-squared test was used to detect any statistically significant differences. RESULTS: 60.4% of RCTs were insufficient. RI resulted in more sufficient treatments compared with MI (49% vs. 30.3% respectively. X2: 7.39, p = 0.007), required fewer visits to complete (2.9 vs. 4.6 respectively. X2: 67.23, p < 0.001) and was the preferred technique by 93.1% of students. The most common procedural errors were underextension of the root canal obturation (48.4%), insufficient obturation (45.5%), and improper coronal seal (35.2%) without a significant difference between the two techniques. 26.4% of the participating students reported that they did not feel confident to perform molar RCT without supervision. CONCLUSION: The quality of molar RCT provided by UG students was generally insufficient. RI partially improved the technical quality of RCT compared with MI. UG students need further endodontic training and experience before they can safely and confidently practise molar RCT.

How to HEEAL: A Patient and Peer-Centric Simulation Curriculum for Medical Error Disclosure.

Introduction: Medical errors are an unfortunate certainty with emotional and psychological consequences for patients and health care providers. No standardized medical curriculum on how to disclose medical errors to patients or peers exists. The novel HEEAL (honesty/empathy/education/apology-awareness/lessen chance for future errors) curriculum addresses this gap in medical education through a multimodality workshop. Methods: This 6-hour, two-part curriculum incorporated didactic and standardized patient (SP) simulation education with rapid cycle deliberate practice (RCDP). The morning focused on provider-patient error disclosure; the afternoon applied the same principles to provider-provider (peer) discussion. Summative simulations with SPs evaluated learners' skill baseline and improvement. Formative simulations run by expert simulation educators used RCDP to provide real-time feedback and opportunities for adjustment. Medical knowledge was measured through pre- and postintervention multiple-choice questions. Learners' confidence and attitude towards medical errors disclosure were surveyed pre- and postintervention with assistance of the Barriers to Error Disclosure Assessment tool, revised with the addition of several questions related to provider-provider disclosure. Results: Fourteen medical students participated in this pilot curriculum. Statistical significance was demonstrated in medical knowledge (p = .01), peer-disclosure skills (p = .001), and confidence in medical error disclosure (p < .001). Although there was improvement in patient-disclosure skills, this did not reach statistical significance (p = .05). Discussion: This curriculum addresses the need for designated training in medical error disclosure. Learners gained knowledge, skills, and confidence in medical error disclosure. We recommend this curriculum for medical students preparing for transition to residency.

Intraoperative adverse events among surgeons in Singapore: a multicentre cross-sectional study on impact and support.

BACKGROUND: It is known that many surgeons encounter intraoperative adverse events which can result in Second Victim Syndrome (SVS), with significant detriment to their emotional and physical health. There is, however, a paucity of Asian studies in this space. The present study thus aimed to explore the degree to which the experience of an adverse event is common among surgeons in Singapore, as well as its impact, and factors affecting their responses and perceived support systems. METHODS: A self-administered survey was sent to surgeons at four large tertiary hospitals. The 42-item questionnaire used a systematic closed and open approach, to assess: Personal experience with intraoperative adverse events, emotional, psychological and physical impact of these events and perceived support systems. RESULTS: The response rate was 57.5% (n = 196). Most respondents were male (54.8%), between 35 and 44 years old, and holding the senior consultant position. In the past 12 months alone, 68.9% recalled an adverse event. The emotional impact was significant, including sadness (63.1%), guilt (53.1%) and anxiety (45.4%). Speaking to colleagues was the most helpful support source (66.7%) and almost all surgeons did not receive counselling (93.3%), with the majority deeming it unnecessary (72.2%). Notably, 68.1% of the surgeons had positive takeaways, gaining new insight and improving vigilance towards errors. Both gender and surgeon experience did not affect the likelihood of errors and emotional impact, but more experienced surgeons were less likely to have positive takeaways (p = 0.035). Individuals may become advocates for patient safety, while simultaneously championing the cause of psychological support for others. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative adverse events are prevalent and its emotional impact is significant, regardless of the surgeon's experience or gender. While colleagues and peer discussions are a pillar of support, healthcare institutions should do more to address the impact and ensuing consequences.

Be careful about what you wish for in NHS patient safety reform.

John Tingle and Amanda Cattini discuss some recent reports on potential changes to litigation procedures for patient harm cases and to the Never Events framework.

An Interprofessional Initiative to Address Tests Pending at Discharge for Hospitalized Pediatric Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Pediatric hospitalized patients often are discharged before all lab tests are completed. Given the risk of medical errors related to inadequate test follow-up, we piloted a collaborative initiative to address tests pending at discharge (TPAD) within our pediatric hospital medicine section. Our objectives were to delineate the responsibilities of case managers and pediatric hospital medicine clinicians in addressing these tests and to establish a communication process. METHODS: We formed an interprofessional team and performed a current state assessment, including a survey to pediatric hospital medicine clinicians to assess time spent following up TPAD and confidence that results were followed up in a timely and appropriate manner. We obtained a list of 1450 individual TPAD for the previous 9 months using an electronic health record data query, from which a list of 26 common and straightforward labs were identified for case manager follow-up. A shared case manager Epic Inbasket for TPAD was created and was checked twice daily. We developed a phased approach to establish a workflow for follow-up. DISCUSSION: The case manager partnership was launched in 4 phases for the duration of the 6-month pilot. However, due to duplication of work and less value of case managers addressing straightforward labs, the pilot was stopped. A more effective and mutually beneficial role for pediatric hospital medicine attendings and case managers may be to have the case managers address complex TPAD and communicate with primary care clinicians and families.

Disclosure following a medical error: lessons learned from a national initiative of workshops with patients, healthcare teams, and executives.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increase in disclosures of medical errors, transparency remains a challenge. Recognized barriers include shame, fear of litigation, disciplinary actions, and loss of patient trust. In 2018, the Israeli Ministry of Health initiated a series of workshops about disclosure of medical errors. The workshops involved medical center executives, healthcare providers, patients, and family members of patients who had previously been harmed by a medical error. This study presents the lessons learned about perceived challenges in disclosure of errors in 15 such workshops. METHODS: Data collection included participant observations in 15 workshops, full audio recordings of all of the workshops, and documentation of detailed field notes. Analysis was performed under thematic analysis guidelines. RESULTS: We identified four main themes: "Providers agree on the value of disclosure of a medical error to the patient"; "Emotional challenges of disclosure of medical error to patients"; "The medico-legal discourse challenges transparency"; and "Providers and patients call for a change in the culture regarding disclosure of medical errors". Participant observations indicated that the presence of a patient who had experienced a tragedy in another hospital, and who was willing to share it created an intimate atmosphere that enabled an open conversation between parties. CONCLUSION: The study shows the moral, human, and educational values of open discourse in a protective setting after the occurrence of a medical error. We believe that workshops like these may help foster a culture of institutional disclosure following medical errors. We recommend that the Ministry of Health extend such workshops to all healthcare facilities, establish guidelines and mandate training for skills in disclosure for all providers.

Adverse Events in Pediatric Dental Practice: Survey of Pediatric Dentists in the United States.

Purpose: To survey pediatric dentists in the United States regarding adverse events during dental care for children. Methods: A self-administered, anonymous online survey was sent to American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry members (N equals 6,327) using REDCap® software (between October and December 2019). The questionnaire (all items with radio-button numerical categories) included five items surveying pediatric adverse event occurrence and seven demographic items. Annualized occurrences of adverse events in US pediatric dental practices were extrapolated from the data collected. Results: The survey response was 11 percent (n equals 704), with 91 percent of respondents reporting that at least one child experienced an adverse event during dental treatment. The two most prevalent adverse events, each reported by 82 percent of respondents, were self-inflicted trauma to soft tissues after local anesthesia and nausea and vomiting, with annualized estimates of 7,816 and 7,003, respectively. Major adverse events (respiratory depression, cardiovascular depression, neurological damage, death) during pediatric dental treatment were reported by 14 percent of respondents (annualized estimate equals 443). "Wrong" errors (wrong tooth/wrong procedure/wrong patient) were reported by 24 percent of respondents (annualized estimate equals 600). Conclusions: Adverse events during pediatric dental care are of noticeable concern with some (wrong tooth/wrong procedure/wrong patient errors) that can be procedurally mitigated.

Medical errors, affected sites, and adverse consequences among patients in the orthopaedic department: Does age matter?

Background: Orthopaedics have become the focus of research on patient safety due to the high incidence of medical errors. Previous studies were based on all orthopaedic patients and rarely conducted empirical analyses from the perspective of age. This study aimed to fill the academic gap in the age variable by comparing medical errors, affected sites, and adverse consequences in orthopaedic patients. Methods: This retrospective study included 329 litigation claims against orthopaedists using data from China Judgments Online. First, we performed computer crawling and screened 5,237 litigation documents using keywords, including medical errors. Second, 2,536 samples were retained through systematic random sampling, and 549 irrelevant cases were deleted after manual reading. Finally, three clinicians from different medical departments selected 329 incidents related to orthopaedics for further analysis, according to the description of the lawsuits. Three other professional orthopaedists evaluated the patients' ages, affected sites of medical errors, and adverse consequences. Results: The greatest number of medical errors was observed in the joints (30.43%) for all orthopaedic patients. However, adult patients (aged 18-60 years) were most susceptible to errors in the extremities (30.42%). A higher rate of complications was associated with a higher rate of morbidity/mortality for the corresponding patients. Medical errors correlated with complications occurred in the following sites: joints (15.38%), extremities (12.50%), spine (16.95%), multiple sites (15.38%), and hands and feet (14.81%). In addition to surgical errors, over 10% of all orthopaedic patients experienced missed diagnoses. The incidence of insufficient adherence to informed consent obligations was 13.5% among adult patients and was much higher in paediatric and older adults patients. When orthopaedic patients suffered from medical technical errors, iatrogenic mortality/morbidity would decrease by 0.3% for one unit increase in age. Conclusion: Dividing patients into different ages demonstrated diverse results in terms of medical errors and affected sites. Negligence in diagnosis and examination can be fatal factors that endanger safety, and complications may cause morbidity/mortality. When patients suffered from technical errors, age is inversely proportional to mortality/morbidity. Special attention needs to be paid to technical errors in the younger older adults population (60-64 years old), which has inspired implications in promoting aging and public health.

Going beyond compliance: A qualitative study of the practice of surgical safety checklist.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) is a tool designed to enhance team communication and patient safety. When used properly, the SSC acts as a layer of defence against never events. In this study, we performed secondary qualitative analysis of operating theatres (OT) SSC observational notes to examine how the SSC was used after an intensive SSC re-implementation effort and drew on relevant theories to shed light on the observed patterns of behaviours. We aimed to go beyond assessing checklist compliance and to understand potential sociopsychological mechanisms of the variations in SSC practices. METHODS: Direct observation notes of 109 surgical procedures across 13 surgical disciplines were made by two trained nurses in the OT of a large tertiary hospital in Singapore from February to April 2022, three months after SSC re-implementation. Only notes relevant to the use of SSC were extracted and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Data were coded following an inductive process to identify themes or patterns of SSC practices. These patterns were subsequently interpreted against a relevant theory to appreciate the potential sociopsychological forces behind them. RESULTS: Two broad types of SSC practices and their respective sub-themes were identified. Type 1 (vs. Type 2) SSC practices are characterized by patience and thoroughness (vs. hurriedness and omission) in carrying out the SSC process, dedication and attention (vs. delegation and distraction) to the SSC safety checks, and frequent (vs. absence of) safety voices during the conduct of SSC. These patterns were conceptualized as safety-seeking action vs. ritualistic action using Merton's social deviance theory. CONCLUSION: Ritualistic practice of the SSC can undermine surgical safety by creating conditions conducive to never events. To fully realize the SSC's potential as an essential tool for communication and safety, a concerted effort is needed to balance thoroughness with efficiency. Additionally, fostering a culture of collaboration and collegiality is crucial to reinforce and enhance the culture of surgical safety.

Mal-positioned nasogastric feeding tubes: are medical students safe to identify them?

OBJECTIVES: Nasogastric tube (NGT) placement is listed against Clinical Imaging in the upcoming Medical Licensing Assessment-compulsory for every graduating UK medical student from 2025. This study aims to establish the ability of medical students to correctly identify the position of an NGT on Chest X-ray (CXR) and to evaluate a learning tool to improve student outcome in this area. METHODS: Fourth-year (MB4) and fifth-year (MB5) medical students were invited to view 20 CXRs with 14 correctly sited and 6 mal-positioned NGT. MB5 students (Intervention) were exposed to an online interactive learning tool, with MB4 students kept as control. One week later, both groups of students were invited to view 20 more CXRs for NGT placement. RESULTS: Only 12 (4.8%) of 249 MB5 students and 5 (3.1%) of 161 MB4 students correctly identified all the NGTs on CXRs. The number of students misidentifying 1 or more mal-positioned NGT as "safe to feed" was 129 (51.8%) for MB5 and 76 (47.2%) for MB4 students. This improved significantly (P < .001) following exposure to the learning tool with 58% scoring all CXRs correctly, while 28% scored 1 or more mal-positioned NGT incorrectly. Students struggled to determine if the NGT tip had adequately passed into the stomach. However, they failed to identify an NG tube in the lung ("never event") in just one out of 1,108 opportunities. CONCLUSION: Medical students' ability to determine if the NGT was in the stomach remains suboptimal despite exposure to over 60 CXRs. Feeding NGT should be formally reported before use. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first attempt at quantifying graduating medical students', and by inference junior doctors', competence in safely identifying misplaced nasogastric feeding tubes. An online, experiential learning resource significantly improved their ability.

Exploring the Factors that Drive Clinical Negligence Claims: Stated Preferences of Those Who Have Experienced Unintended Harm.

BACKGROUND: Better understanding of the factors that influence patients to make a financial claim for compensation is required to inform policy decisions. This study aimed to assess the relative importance of factors that influence those who have experienced a patient safety incident (PSI) to make a claim for compensation. METHOD: Participants completed an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) involving 10 single profile tasks where they chose whether or not to file a claim. DCE data were modelled using logistic, mixed logit and latent class regressions; scenario analyses, external validity, and willingness to accept were also conducted. RESULTS: A total of 1029 participants in the United Kingdom responded to the survey. An appropriate apology and a satisfactory investigation reduced the likelihood of claiming. Respondents were more likely to claim if they could hold those responsible accountable, if the process was simple and straightforward, if the compensation amount was higher, if the likelihood of compensation was high or uncertain, if the time to receive a decision was quicker, and if they used the government compensation scheme. Men are more likely to claim for low impact PSIs. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The actions taken by the health service after a PSI, and people's perceptions about the probability of success and the size of potential reward, can influence whether a claim is made. Results show the importance of giving an appropriate apology and conducting a satisfactory investigation. This stresses the importance around how patients are treated after a PSI in influencing the clinical negligence claims that are made.

[17 years of the critical incident reporting and learning system "jeder-fehler-zaehlt.de" for primary care: Analysis of reports]. / 17 Jahre hausärztliches Fehlerberichts- und Lernsystem "jeder-fehler-zaehlt.de" ­ Analyse des Berichtsbestandes.

BACKGROUND: The topic of patient safety has been a subject of much discussion since the end of the last millennium. Ensuring patient safety is a central challenge in health care. An important tool to raise awareness for and learn from adverse events and thus promote patient safety are error-reporting and learning systems (Critical Incident Reporting System = CIRS). METHODS: More than 17 years after its establishment, the CIRS "jeder-fehler-zaehlt.de" (JFZ) for German primary care has undergone a revision in terms of content and technology. The revised web-based system can be used for reporting as well as for classifying and analyzing incident reports. During this process, a descriptive analysis of the current report inventory was carried out, with a focus on serious medication errors. This included all 781 valid incident reports received between September 2004 and December 2021. RESULTS: In 576 of the 781 reports (73.8%), the GP practice was directly involved in the critical incident. Among error types, process errors predominated (79.8% of the classifications, 99.1% of the reports) compared with knowledge and skills errors (20.2% of the classifications, 39.7% of the reports). Communication errors (63.0%) were the most common contributing factor to critical incidents, followed by flaws in tasks and measures (39.7%). Serious and permanent patient harm was rarely reported (8.3% of the reports), whereas temporary patient harm was more common (40.3% of the reports). Incident reports about medication errors with at least serious patient harm included, in particular, substances that affected blood clotting, corticosteroids, and opiates. DISCUSSION: Our results complement the rates that are reported internationally for error types, patient harm, and contributing factors. Serious but preventable adverse events, so-called never events, are frequently associated with the medication process in both JFZ reports and the literature. CONCLUSION: Critical incident reporting systems cannot provide accurate information about the frequency of errors in health care, but they can offer important insights into, for example, serious medication errors. Therefore, they offer both employees and healthcare institutions an opportunity for individual and institutional learning.