Medical Error Disclosure: An Entrustable Professional Activity During an Objective Standardized Clinical Examination for Clerkship Students.

Introduction: Most health care providers will be involved in a medical error during their careers. It is critical that future physicians receive formal training on error disclosure. Methods: We designed a formative skills-based objective standardized clinical exam (OSCE) for fourth-year medical students to assess competence in disclosing an error during a required entrustable professional activity. Faculty observed the encounter and completed a checklist evaluating students' performance in communication skills and content knowledge. Students received immediate formative feedback. They then participated in a facilitated case-based experience, discussed the critical elements of disclosure, utilized role-play to reinforce skills, and reflected on self-care practices. Finally, students completed a survey evaluating their perception of the OSCE's impact on their disclosure knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Results: Ninety-two students participated in the OSCE. Of those, 67 (73%) completed a retrospective pre/post survey assessing their disclosure knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Forty-one (62%) did not identify the error. Students who identified the error (26, 39%) were more likely to use the two-patient identifier than students who did not identify the error, χ2(1) = 13.3, p < .001. Self-reported comfort and confidence in disclosure improved, as did self-care practices (ps ≤ .005). Discussion: Students agreed that health care providers should disclose an error and know how to do so. Student self-reported comfort in disclosure and knowledge of how to disclose and how to report an error all improved following the OSCE and structured debrief. The OSCE and case-based experience can be adapted for implementation in curricula about error disclosure.

Disclosing medical errors: how do we prepare our students?

PURPOSE: Despite patient safety initiatives, medical errors remain common and devastating. Disclosing errors is not only ethical, but also promotes restoration of the doctor-patient relationship. However, studies show active avoidance of error disclosure and the need for explicit training. In the South African setting, sparse information exists in terms of undergraduate medical training in error disclosure. To address this knowledge gap, the training of error disclosure in an undergraduate medical programme was examined, against the background of the available literature. The objective was to formulate a strategy to improve error disclosure teaching and practice, with the goal of improving patient care. METHODS: Firstly, the literature was reviewed regarding the training of medical error disclosure. Secondly, the undergraduate medical training in error disclosure was probed, by looking at the pertinent findings from a broader study on undergraduate communication skills training. The design of the study was descriptive and cross-sectional. Anonymous questionnaires were distributed to all fourth- and fifth-year undergraduate medical students. Data were predominantly analysed quantitatively. Open-ended questions were analysed qualitatively using grounded theory coding. RESULTS: Out of 132 fifth-year medical students, 106 participated (response rate 80.3%), while 65 out of 120 fourth-year students participated (response rate 54.2%). Of these participants, 48 fourth-year students (73.9%) and 64 fifth-year students (60.4%) reported infrequent teaching in the disclosure of medical errors. Almost half of the fourth-year students (49.2%) considered themselves novices in error disclosure, while 53.3% of fifth-year students rated their ability as average. According to 37/63 (58.7%) fourth-year students and 51/100 (51.0%) fifth-year students, senior doctors seldom or never modelled patient-centred care in the clinical training setting. These results resonated with the findings of other studies that showed lack of patient-centredness, as well as insufficient training in error disclosure, with resultant low confidence in this skill. CONCLUSION: The study findings confirmed a dire need for more frequent experiential training in the disclosure of medical errors, in undergraduate medical education. Medical educators should view errors as learning opportunities to improve patient care and model error disclosure in the clinical learning environment.

Interprofessional Medication Error Disclosure Training Using a Telehealth Consultation Simulation.

Objective. Health professions students must develop collaborative skills to disclose errors effectively and improve patient safety. We proposed that an interprofessional simulation using telehealth technology would provide medical and pharmacy students the opportunity to practice, develop, and grow in their confidence and skills of working collaboratively and disclosing medication errors.Methods. A three-phase interprofessional student simulation was developed. Phase 1 included individual student preparation. An interprofessional telehealth consultation encounter occurred in phase 2 for the error disclosure between the pharmacy and medical students. Phase 3 included faculty-led interprofessional debrief sessions. A pre- and postsimulation survey assessed students' experiences regarding their confidence in error disclosure, use of telehealth technology, and the role of the community pharmacist. Faculty evaluated pharmacy student performance using a 12-point rubric.Results. Presimulation survey responses (n=173) were compared to postsimulation survey responses (n=140). Significant changes were seen for all students' confidence in error disclosure and use of telehealth technology. No significant change was noted in the students' understanding of the community pharmacists' role on the interprofessional team. Pharmacy student performance-based rubric data (n=148) revealed a median score of seven out of 12 for error disclosure and interprofessional communication items.Conclusion. Medical and pharmacy students perceived their confidence improved in interprofessional error disclosure and use of telehealth consultation technology through this interprofessional simulation. Pharmacy students' error disclosure and interprofessional communication skill development were assessed through this simulation.

Patient Safety Awareness Among Dental Students In Lahore, Pakistan: A Multi-Centre Studye.

BACKGROUND: Awareness of key issues associated with patient safety is vital for improving patient care in all fields of medical sciences including dentistry. This study was done to assess awareness among dental undergraduates towards patient safety in different dental institutions of Lahore, Pakistan. METHODS: It was a cross-sectional analytical study conducted at Combined Military Hospital Lahore Medical College & Institute of Dentistry from 1st May to 30th November, 2020. Two hundred third and fourth year BDS students (149 females and 51males; mean age 21.91±1.08) of 4 dental institutions of Lahore, mostly from private institutions (79.5%) completed Awareness of Patient Safety Questionnaire (APSQIII) to assess awareness of patient safety in dental undergraduates. Data was analyzed through SPSS 21. RESULTS: Teaching and learning about patient safety got the highest item scores while "Team functioning" got the highest 6.1 mean domain score. "Professional incompetence as an error cause" got the lowest 3.1 mean score followed by "Disclosure responsibility" (4.3). No significant difference was seen with respect to gender. Fourth year students were found to be more aware about error disclosure and error reporting confidence with statistically significant difference. All reverse coded items were scored in disagreed range by participants. CONCLUSIONS: Despite positive attitudes towards patient safety, lack of awareness was seen in key issues. Incorporation of patient safety in undergraduate curriculum may help in improving patient care and health services.

Effects of Practicing With and Obtaining Crowdsourced Feedback From the Video-Based Communication Assessment App on Resident Physicians' Adverse Event Communication Skills: Pre-post Trial.

BACKGROUND: US residents require practice and feedback to meet Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education mandates and patient expectations for effective communication after harmful errors. Current instructional approaches rely heavily on lectures, rarely provide individualized feedback to residents about communication skills, and may not assure that residents acquire the skills desired by patients. The Video-based Communication Assessment (VCA) app is a novel tool for simulating communication scenarios for practice and obtaining crowdsourced assessments and feedback on physicians' communication skills. We previously established that crowdsourced laypeople can reliably assess residents' error disclosure skills with the VCA app. However, its efficacy for error disclosure training has not been tested. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of using VCA practice and feedback as a stand-alone intervention for the development of residents' error disclosure skills. METHODS: We conducted a pre-post study in 2020 with pathology, obstetrics and gynecology, and internal medicine residents at an academic medical center in the United States. At baseline, residents each completed 2 specialty-specific VCA cases depicting medical errors. Audio responses were rated by at least 8 crowdsourced laypeople using 6 items on a 5-point scale. At 4 weeks, residents received numerical and written feedback derived from layperson ratings and then completed 2 additional cases. Residents were randomly assigned cases at baseline and after feedback assessments to avoid ordinal effects. Ratings were aggregated to create overall assessment scores for each resident at baseline and after feedback. Residents completed a survey of demographic characteristics. We used a 2×3 split-plot ANOVA to test the effects of time (pre-post) and specialty on communication ratings. RESULTS: In total, 48 residents completed 2 cases at time 1, received a feedback report at 4 weeks, and completed 2 more cases. The mean ratings of residents' communication were higher at time 2 versus time 1 (3.75 vs 3.53; P<.001). Residents with prior error disclosure experience performed better at time 1 compared to those without such experience (ratings: mean 3.63 vs mean 3.46; P=.02). No differences in communication ratings based on specialty or years in training were detected. Residents' communication was rated higher for angry cases versus sad cases (mean 3.69 vs mean 3.58; P=.01). Less than half of all residents (27/62, 44%) reported prior experience with disclosing medical harm to patients; experience differed significantly among specialties (P<.001) and was lowest for pathology (1/17, 6%). CONCLUSIONS: Residents at all training levels can potentially improve error disclosure skills with VCA practice and feedback. Error disclosure curricula should prepare residents for responding to various patient affects. Simulated error disclosure may particularly benefit trainees in diagnostic specialties, such as pathology, with infrequent real-life error disclosure practice opportunities. Future research should examine the effectiveness, feasibility, and acceptability of VCA within a longitudinal error disclosure curriculum.

Classifying and Disclosing Medical Errors.

Medical errors are an unfortunate but common occurrence in health care. It is important to understand what medical errors are and what types of harm can occur to patients. Along with recognition of the error, disclosure is an equally important part of the process. Clinicians should provide open and honest discussion about the events that occurred to patients along with feedback to institutions on ways to prevent such errors in the future.

Video-Based Communication Assessment of Physician Error Disclosure Skills by Crowdsourced Laypeople and Patient Advocates Who Experienced Medical Harm: Reliability Assessment With Generalizability Theory.

BACKGROUND: Residents may benefit from simulated practice with personalized feedback to prepare for high-stakes disclosure conversations with patients after harmful errors and to meet American Council on Graduate Medical Education mandates. Ideally, feedback would come from patients who have experienced communication after medical harm, but medical researchers and leaders have found it difficult to reach this community, which has made this approach impractical at scale. The Video-Based Communication Assessment app is designed to engage crowdsourced laypeople to rate physician communication skills but has not been evaluated for use with medical harm scenarios. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the reliability of 2 assessment groups (crowdsourced laypeople and patient advocates) in rating physician error disclosure communication skills using the Video-Based Communication Assessment app. METHODS: Internal medicine residents used the Video-Based Communication Assessment app; the case, which consisted of 3 sequential vignettes, depicted a delayed diagnosis of breast cancer. Panels of patient advocates who have experienced harmful medical error, either personally or through a family member, and crowdsourced laypeople used a 5-point scale to rate the residents' error disclosure communication skills (6 items) based on audiorecorded responses. Ratings were aggregated across items and vignettes to create a numerical communication score for each physician. We used analysis of variance, to compare stringency, and Pearson correlation between patient advocates and laypeople, to identify whether rank order would be preserved between groups. We used generalizability theory to examine the difference in assessment reliability between patient advocates and laypeople. RESULTS: Internal medicine residents (n=20) used the Video-Based Communication Assessment app. All patient advocates (n=8) and 42 of 59 crowdsourced laypeople who had been recruited provided complete, high-quality ratings. Patient advocates rated communication more stringently than crowdsourced laypeople (patient advocates: mean 3.19, SD 0.55; laypeople: mean 3.55, SD 0.40; P<.001), but patient advocates' and crowdsourced laypeople's ratings of physicians were highly correlated (r=0.82, P<.001). Reliability for 8 raters and 6 vignettes was acceptable (patient advocates: G coefficient 0.82; crowdsourced laypeople: G coefficient 0.65). Decision studies estimated that 12 crowdsourced layperson raters and 9 vignettes would yield an acceptable G coefficient of 0.75. CONCLUSIONS: Crowdsourced laypeople may represent a sustainable source of reliable assessments of physician error disclosure skills. For a simulated case involving delayed diagnosis of breast cancer, laypeople correctly identified high and low performers. However, at least 12 raters and 9 vignettes are required to ensure adequate reliability and future studies are warranted. Crowdsourced laypeople rate less stringently than raters who have experienced harm. Future research should examine the value of the Video-Based Communication Assessment app for formative assessment, summative assessment, and just-in-time coaching of error disclosure communication skills.

Medical error disclosure in the Italian healthcare context: A delicate balance between ethical obligations and the principle of non-self-incrimination.

Surprisingly, Italian legal doctrine and jurisprudence never systematically address the medical error disclosure issue. The topic of medical error communication represents a non-negligible profile of interest, relating to the possible detrimental effects on doctors who accuse themselves of conduct that does not comply with the lex artis. The effects of error disclosure on the effectiveness of insurance guarantees in civil and administrative liability are particularly relevant, as are the implications for ethical liability. Although the burden of reporting an error falls within the wide range of informative duties doctors hold, it still seems far from having found a factual statement in clinical practice, especially in Italy. This applies whether the error has a marginal or significant impact on the patient's health. The reasons lay in a very contradictory legal framework. Doctors tend with increasing ease not to comply with their information obligation - especially in cases where fulfilling this duty means admitting a personal, professional error - to preserve the integrity of their professional images. This article aims to offer a brief overview of that topic in the context of Italian healthcare.

Education program on medical error disclosure for emergency medicine residents using standardized patients.

PURPOSE: We aimed to develop a program for error disclosure for emergency medicine (EM) residents to determine its effects. METHODS: Fifteen EM residents participated in 2020. The program included two-error disclosure sessions using standardized patients (SPs), a didactic lecture, and debriefing. The Kirkpatrick model was used to evaluate this program. Satisfaction scores and narrative reactions were collected (level 1). Residents were asked to choose their actions and explain reasons for the representative error cases before and after the program (level 2). After 2 months, they were asked to write their experiences of disclosing errors to real patients (level 3). The differences in the disclosing communication scores allocated by the SPs were compared between the senior and junior residents. RESULTS: The residents' satisfaction scores were high. Before the program, some residents chose not to disclose errors when there were no harmful sequelae at the time of the incident. After the program, opinions changed, and the residents thought that all errors should be disclosed. Before the program, most residents disclosed the errors to patients first; after the program, they would report to the hospital first to receive guidance. After 2 months, five residents reported disclosing errors to real patients. The senior residents' total scores and the scores for "prevention of future errors" were higher. CONCLUSION: The residents showed confidence in error disclosure while maintaining rapport with the real patient, and some were satisfied with their disclosure approach. Our error disclosure program for EM residents had a positive effect on their behavior and attitude toward error disclosure.

A practical example of an open disclosure process for people with intellectual disabilities in the Republic of Ireland.

Literature pertaining to open disclosure predominantly refers to acute care settings; this is the case in, for example, the UK, Republic of Ireland, Australia, Korea and the USA. There is, however, a dearth of literature regarding open disclosure related to people with intellectual disabilities. A practice example of open disclosure is presented here, following a serious adverse event in an organisation supporting adults with intellectual disabilities. The aim of the process was to openly disclose in a meaningful way to adults with significant intellectual disabilities and communication difficulties. An apology pathway was developed by a multidisciplinary team based on individual communication needs. A suite of resources was developed including easy read-picture agendas and sign language to support increased understanding of the apology. Service users received the apology first, followed by meetings with their families. This practice example has positive implications for service providers for people with intellectual disabilities.

Assessing team communication with patients' families: Findings from utilizing the Communication Assessment Tool-Team (CAT-T) in an interprofessional error disclosure simulation.

OBJECTIVE: The CAT-T was incorporated into an interprofessional error disclosure (ED) simulation to assess team communication with a patient family member. METHODS: Interprofessional student groups (n = 55) planned for team-based ED with facilitation by faculty. Students participated in three scenarios of ED with a standardized family member (SFM) who displayed the emotions of sadness, anger, and distrust sequentially. SFMs completed the CAT-T tool for each emotion. CAT-T items were classified as empathy or disclosure skills by factor analysis. Qualitative comments from the SFM were provided during debrief. RESULTS: Students performed well on team-based ED from the SFM perspective. Team performance improved when the SFM displayed distrust after observing peers disclose for the sad and angry emotion. Higher composite scores were found on CAT-T items categorized as empathy skills. CONCLUSIONS: The ED simulation allowed students to practice disclosure skills in a low-stakes environment and receive feedback from a SFM based on behaviors evaluated on the CAT-T. The simulation design allowed students to improve their performance by incorporating feedback into subsequent cycles. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Immersive experiences where observable student behaviors can be assessed are important to enhance IPE curriculum and to build skills in pre-licensure students that will be foundational for collaborative practice.

Error Disclosure Algorithms: How to Disclose Colleague's Medical Error at Individual and Organizational Levels.

Background: Medical error is one of the most important causes of mortality and morbidity in the health care system. Considering the significance of medical error management in the healthcare system, error disclosure is an imperative moral responsibility of medical and healthcare professionals from medical ethics experts' perspective. In literature, no or inadequate protocols were suggested for disclosing colleague's medical error; and hence, this study was conducted to provide two algorithms for colleague's medical error disclosure at individual and organizational levels. Methods: This study conducted a narrative review on several valid Internet databases, including PubMed, Science Direct, and Scopus. First, the literature on the colleague's error was reviewed using articles of the last 20 years focusing on medical errors and error disclosure keywords. Next, two algorithms were developed for the colleague's error disclosure for individuals and with the assistance of organizations, respectively. Results: If we personally notice a colleague's error at an individual level, we should plan for a conversation to encourage the colleague to inform the patient or the related organization about the error. If we notice a medical error from a colleague relating to an organization, we should decide based on circumstances considering the organization's responsible parties for handling error disclosure. Conclusion: This study proposes a simple protocol for detecting peer error at the individual level and at the organizational level, using the existing literature. However, the improvement of these types of methods requires analysis of the specific conditions of each health system.

Communication about medical errors.

Communication about medical errors with patients and families demonstrates respect, compassion, and commitment by providing information, acknowledging harm, and maintaining trust through a process of dialogue that involves multiple conversations. This communication requires knowledge, skills, and attitudes that allow healthcare professionals to discuss facts transparently, take responsibility for what happened, and express regret and (as appropriate) apologize; these abilities also allow professionals to describe what will happen next for the patient and explain what will be done to prevent the error from happening to others in the future. Communication about medical errors also encompasses two other contexts: reporting information about errors to healthcare organizations through data collection systems designed to improve patient safety, and discussing errors with fellow healthcare professionals to promote professional learning and receive emotional support. Communication about errors in these three contexts depends on healthcare professionals who are honest, reflective, compassionate, courageous, accountable, reassuring, and willing to acknowledge and engage their own feelings of sadness, fear, and guilt. Healthcare organizations should promote a systems approach to patient safety and cultivate a culture of transparency and learning in which healthcare professionals are supported as they cope with the distress they experience after an error. Communication about errors should be incorporated into all healthcare practice settings (medical, surgical, in-patient, out-patient), and can be taught to medical students and residents using didactic, role-playing, or simulation methodologies.

Investigation of medical error-reporting system and reporting status in Iran in 2019.

INTRODUCTION: Reporting medical errors is a major challenge in patient safety and improving service quality. The purpose of the present study is to investigate the status of error reporting and the challenges of developing an error-reporting system in Iran. METHODS: This study was designed with qualitative approach and grounded theory method in teaching hospitals affiliated to Iran University of Medical Sciences. The views of safety authorities at various levels of management, including those responsible for safety at the Ministry of Health, Vice Chancellor and Hospitals affiliated to Iran University of Medical Sciences, were investigated in 2019 regarding adverse events. RESULTS: Four major themes were identified included iceberg reporting and disclosure, weak reporting, underreporting, and non-error disclosure. The most common problems in reporting medical error were non-involvement of physicians in the error-reporting process, structural (human and information) bugs in root cause analysis sessions, and defective error prevention approaches designed based on the failure mode and effects analysis. DISCUSSION: Despite a large number of medical errors occurred in health-care settings, error reporting is still very low, with only a limited number of errors being reported routinely in hospitals and the rest are minor and occasional reports. CONCLUSION: Creating a mandatory error-reporting system and requiring physicians to report and participate in error analysis sessions can create a safety culture and increase the error-reporting rate.

A Mixed Methods Approach to Assess the Impact of an Interprofessional Education Medical Error Simulation.

Objective. To evaluate the impact of a single, half-day interprofessional education (IPE) simulation on disclosing medical errors, and to compare the impacts on pharmacy students with those on students from other health professional programs. Methods. A mixed methods approach was used to provide a comprehensive understanding of the immediate and persistent outcomes of a realistic medical error disclosure simulation. Anonymous pre- and post-simulation quantitative data were collected using a validated attitudinal survey instrument administered at the time of the simulation. To assess more sustained impacts of the simulation, uni-professional focus groups were held several months following the simulation. Results. The survey analysis showed that a significant positive change in attitudes towards teamwork, roles and responsibilities occurred in students in most of the professions represented, with pharmacy students experiencing positive changes across a wider range of interprofessional attitudes. The focus group results showed that there were persistent impacts across all professions on learners' knowledge, skills, attitudes, and confidence in disclosing medical errors in interprofessional teams. Conclusion. Mixed methods analysis of a high-fidelity IPE error disclosure simulation demonstrated that single IPE activities, if realistic, can have significant positive impacts on students' interprofessional attitudes and competencies, and increase confidence in conducting team-based error disclosures.

American Pharmacists Attitudes and Behaviors Regarding Medication Error Disclosure.

BACKGROUND: Patient safety places emphasis on full disclosure, transparency, and a commitment to prevent future errors. Studies addressing the disclosure of medication errors in the profession of pharmacy are lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study examined attitudes and behaviors of American pharmacists regarding medication errors and their disclosure to patients. METHODS: A 4-page questionnaire was mailed to a nationwide random sample of 2,002 pharmacists. It included items to assess pharmacists' knowledge of and experience with medication errors and their disclosure. The data was collected over three months and analyzed using IBM SPSS 22.0. The study received IRB exempt status. RESULTS: The response rate was 12.6% (n = 252). The average pharmacist respondent was a 57-year old (+ 12.1 years), Caucasian (79.8%), male (59.9%), with a BS Pharmacy degree (73.8%), and licensed for 33 years (+ 12.8 years). Most respondents were employed in a hospital (26.4%) or community (31.0 %) setting and held staff (30.9%), manager (29.1%), or clinical staff (20.6%) positions. Respondents reported having been involved in a medication error as a patient (31.0%) or a pharmacist (95.5%). The data suggest that full disclosure is not being achieved by pharmacists. Significant differences in some attitudes and behaviors were uncovered when community pharmacists were compared to their hospital counterparts. CONCLUSION: There is room for improvement regarding proper medication error disclosure by pharmacists.

Disclosing adverse events and near misses to parents of neonates.

Critically ill newborns receiving intensive and complex care may be subject to medical errors and adverse events. Like most physicians, neonatologists do not feel comfortable disclosing their errors and may need assistance in learning how to do so. Understanding useful models of error disclosure, and communication training, will likely be beneficial.

When facing our fallibility constitutes "safe practice": Further evidence for the Medical Error Disclosure Competence (MEDC) guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: This study pursues further empirical validation of the "Medical Error Disclosure Competence (MEDC)" guidelines. The following research questions are addressed: (1) What communicative skills predict patients' perceived disclosure adequacy? (2) To what extent do patients' adequacy perceptions predict disclosure effectiveness? (3) Are there any significant sex differences in the MEDC constructs? METHODS: A sample of 193 respondents completed an online survey about a medical error they experienced in the past 5 years, and about the subsequent disclosure of that error to them. RESULTS: One in four patients had experienced a medical error, only a third of them received a disclosure. Only interpersonal adaptability influenced disclosure adequacy, with a large effect size. Adequacy, in turn, predicted both patients' relational distancing and approach behaviors. Nonverbally skillful disclosures significantly decreased the likelihood of patient trauma. Expressions of remorse significantly increased patient resilience. Nonverbal skills (-) and a full account (+) predicted patients' tendency to harm themselves. Males were more reactive to disclosures than female patients. CONCLUSION: MEDC guidelines-adherent disclosure communication maintains the provider-patient relationship, increase patient resilience, and decreases patient trauma after a medical error. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Given the results of this study, adherence to the MEDC-guidelines must be considered "safe practice."

Individual and Team-Based Medical Error Disclosure: Dialectical Tensions Among Health Care Providers.

Researchers from disciplines of education, health communication, law and risk management, medicine, nursing, and pharmacy examined communication tensions among interprofessional (IP) health care providers regarding medical error disclosure utilizing patient simulation. Using relational dialectics theory, we examined how communication tensions manifested in both individual-provided medical error disclosure and IP team-based disclosure. Two dialectical tensions that health care providers experienced in disclosure conversations were identified: (a) leadership and support, and (b) transparency and protectionism. Whereas these tensions were identified in an IP education setting using simulation, findings support the need for future research in clinical practice, which may inform best practices for various disclosure models. Identifying dialectical tensions in disclosure conversations may enable health communication experts to effectively engage health care providers, risk management, and patient care teams in terms of support and education related to communicating about medical errors.

A Team Disclosure of Error Educational Activity: Objective Outcomes.

Medical errors can involve multiple team members. Few curricula are being developed to provide instruction on disclosing medical errors that include simulation training with interprofessional team disclosure. To explore more objective evidence for the value of an educational activity on team disclosure of errors, faculty developed and assessed the effectiveness of a multimodal educational activity for learning team-based disclosure of a medical error. This study employed a methodological triangulation research design. Participants (N = 458) included students enrolled in academic programs at three separate institutions. The activity allowed students to practice team communication while: (1) discussing a medical error within the team; (2) planning for the disclosure of the error; and (3) conducting the disclosure. Faculty assessed individual student's change in knowledge and, using a rubric, rated the performance of the student teams during a simulation with a standardized family member (SFM). Students had a high level of preexisting knowledge and demonstrated the greatest knowledge gains in questions regarding the approach to disclosure (P < .001) and timing of an apology (P < .001). Both SFMs and individual students rated the team error disclosure behavior highly (rho = 0.54; P < .001). Most participants (more than 80%) felt the activity was worth their time and that they were more comfortable with disclosing a medical error as a result of having completed the activity. This activity for interprofessional simulation of team-based disclosure of a medical error was effective for teaching students about and how to perform this type of important disclosure.