Criminal responsibilities of nurses in Turkish criminal law and determining the awareness levels of senior nursing students regarding this responsibility.

BACKGROUND: It is noteworthy that there is an increase in medical lawsuits filed against nurses in Turkey and in the rest of the world. The purpose of this article is to examine nurses' criminal liability and senior nursing students' awareness of these responsibilities. METHODS: All senior students (n = 309) of the Faculty of Nursing who were studying in the 2020-2021 academic year of the university constituted the population of the research. The study was completed with 300 students who were studying between the dates of the research and who agreed to participate in the research. Data was collected online via Google Forms. The data obtained from the research was analyzed with the program SPSS 20. Numbers and percentages, averages, and chi-square tests were used to evaluate the data. RESULTS: This article provides an overview of nurses' criminal liability and senior nursing students' awareness of these responsibilities. The article offers striking implications regarding the awareness of trainee nurses who have not yet started their careers regarding the criminal liability of nurses. CONCLUSION: The result of our research clearly revealed that the majority of senior nursing students have insufficient knowledge about professional criminal responsibilities, that they are not aware of their duties, powers, and criminal responsibilities as defined in legislation, and that they do not know the types of criminal responsibilities.

Optimising acute non-critical inter-hospital transfers: A review of evidence, practice and patient perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: Patients who present to hospital with an acute non-critical illness or injury, which is considered outside the capability framework of that hospital to treat, will require inter-hospital transfer (IHT) to a hospital with a higher level of capability for that condition. Delays in IHT can negatively impact patient care and patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To review and synthesis academic evidence, practitioner insights and patient perspectives on ways to improve IHT from regional to metro hospitals. DESIGN: A rapid review methodology identified one review and 14 primary studies. Twelve practitioner interviews identified insights into practice and implementation, and the patient perspectives were explored through a citizen panel with 15 participants. FINDINGS: The rapid review found evidence relating to clinician and patient decision factors, protocols, communication practices and telemedicine. Practitioner interviews revealed challenges in making the initial decision, determining appropriate destinations and dealing with pushback. Adequate support and communication were raised as important to improve IHT. The citizen panel found that the main concern with IHT was delays. Citizen panel participants suggested dedicated transfer teams, education and information transfer systems to improve IHT. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Common challenges in IHT include making the initial decision to transfer and communicating with other health services and patients and families. In identifying the appropriateness of transferring acute non-critical patients, clear and effective communication is central to appropriate and timely IHT; this evidence review indicates that education, protocols and information management could make IHT processes smoother.

Strengthening open disclosure after incidents in maternity care: a realist synthesis of international research evidence.

BACKGROUND: Open Disclosure (OD) is open and timely communication about harmful events arising from health care with those affected. It is an entitlement of service-users and an aspect of their recovery, as well as an important dimension of service safety improvement. Recently, OD in maternity care in the English National Health Service has become a pressing public issue, with policymakers promoting multiple interventions to manage the financial and reputational costs of communication failures. There is limited research to understand how OD works and its effects in different contexts. METHODS: Realist literature screening, data extraction, and retroductive theorisation involving two advisory stakeholder groups. Data relevant to families, clinicians, and services were mapped to theorise the relationships between contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes. From these maps, key aspects for successful OD were identified. RESULTS: After realist quality appraisal, 38 documents were included in the synthesis (22 academic, 2 training guidance, and 14 policy report). 135 explanatory accounts were identified from the included documents (with n = 41 relevant to families; n = 37 relevant to staff; and n = 37 relevant to services). These were theorised as five key mechanism sets: (a) meaningful acknowledgement of harm, (b) opportunity for family involvement in reviews and investigations, (c) possibilities for families and staff to make sense of what happened, (d) specialist skills and psychological safety of clinicians, and (e) families and staff knowing that improvements are happening. Three key contextual factors were identified: (a) the configuration of the incident (how and when identified and classified as more or less severe); (b) national or state drivers, such as polices, regulations, and schemes, designed to promote OD; and (c) the organisational context within which these these drivers are recieived and negotiated. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first review to theorise how OD works, for whom, in what circumstances, and why. We identify and examine from the secondary data the five key mechanisms for successful OD and the three contextual factors that influence this. The next study stage will use interview and ethnographic data to test, deepen, or overturn our five hypothesised programme theories to explain what is required to strengthen OD in maternity services.

Can Asking Emergency Physicians Whether or Not They Would Have Done Something Differently (WYHDSD) be a Useful Screening Tool to Identify Emergency Department Error?

BACKGROUND: Error in emergency medicine remains common and difficult to identify. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if questioning emergency physician reviewers as to whether or not they would have done something differently (Would you have done something differently? [WYHDSD]) can be a useful marker to identify error. METHODS: Prospective data were collected on all patients presenting to an academic emergency department (ED) between 2017 and 2021. All cases who met the following criteria were identified: 1) returned to ED within 72 h and admitted; 2) transferred to intensive care unit from floor within 24 h of admission; 3) expired within 24 h of arrival; or 4) patient or provider complaint. Cases were randomly assigned to emergency physicians and reviewed using an electronic tool to assess for error and adverse events. Reviewers were then mandated to answer WYHDSD in the management of the case. RESULTS: During the study period, 6672 cases were reviewed. Of the 5857 cases where reviewers would not have done something differently, 5847 cases were found to have no error. The question WYHDSD had a sensitivity of 97.4% in predicting error and a negative predictive value of 99.8%. CONCLUSION: There was a significantly higher rate of near misses, adverse events, and errors attributable to an adverse event in cases where the reviewer would have done something differently (WHDSD) compared with cases where they would not. Therefore, asking reviewers if they WHDSD could potentially be used as a marker to identify error and improve patient care in the ED.

Daytime, evening, and overnight: the 24-h radiology cycle and impact on interpretative accuracy.

PURPOSE: To assess the influence of time of day when a study is interpreted on discrepancy rates for common and advanced studies performed in the acute community setting. METHODS: This retrospective study used the databank of a U.S. teleradiology company to retrieve studies between 2012 and 2016 with a preliminary report followed by a final report by the on-site client hospital. Neuroradiology, abdominal radiology, and musculoskeletal radiology studies were included. Teleradiologists were fellowship trained in one of these subspecialty areas. Daytime, evening, and overnight times were defined. Associations between major and minor discrepancies, time of day, and whether the study was common or advanced were tested with significance set at p = .05. RESULTS: A total of 5,883,980 studies were analyzed. There were 8444 major discrepancies (0.14%) and 17,208 minor discrepancies (0.29%). For common studies, daytime (0.13%) and evening (0.13%) had lower major discrepancy rates compared to overnight (0.14%) (daytime to overnight, RR = 0.57, 95%CI: 0.45, 0.72, p < 0.01 and evening to overnight, RR = 0.57, 95%CI: 0.49,0.67, p < 0.01). Minor discrepancy rates for common studies were decreased for evening (0.29%) compared to overnight (0.30%) (RR = 0.89, 95%CI: 0.80,0.99, p = 0.029). For advanced studies, daytime (.15%) had lower major discrepancy rates compared to evening (0.20%) and overnight (.23%) (daytime to evening, RR = 0.77, 95%CI: 0.61, 0.97, p = 0.028 and daytime to overnight, RR = 0.66, 95%CI: 0.50, 0.87, p ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSION: Significantly higher major discrepancy rates for studies interpreted overnight suggest the need for radiologists to exercise greater caution when interpreting studies overnight and may require practice management strategies to help optimize overnight work conditions. The lower major discrepancy rates on advanced studies interpreted during the daytime suggest the need for reserving advanced studies for interpretation during the day when possible.

Nurses' attitudes and barriers to incident reporting in Malta's acute general hospital.

Although the science of patient safety has been developed and implemented widely, there remains a large gap in the understanding of the chain of events that lead to safety incidents, as well as their cost to patients, healthcare staff and the organisation as a whole. The aim of the study was to evaluate nurses' knowledge and awareness of the local incident reporting system at Malta's acute general hospital. A quantitative, descriptive cross-sectional design was used and data were collected from nurses through an online survey. A total of 323 questionnaires were received with a response rate of 23%. Various shortages within the local setting were identified, including lack of feedback and awareness of the system. Therefore, it is suggested that incident reporting should be given a higher profile on the organisation's agenda and incorporate employed members of staff rather than volunteers.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of electronic prescription in reducing medical and medical errors (systematic review study).

INTRODUCTION: The use of electronic systems in prescription is considered as the final solution to overcome the many problems of the paper transcription process, especially with the outbreak of Coronavirus needs more attention than before. But despite the many advantages, its implementation faces many challenges and obstacles. Therefore, the present study was conducted to review the effectiveness of computerized physician order entry systems (CPOE) on relative risk reduction on medication error and adverse drug events (ADE). METHOD: This study is one of the systematic review studies that was conducted in 2021. In this study, searching for keywords such as E-Electronic Prescription, Patient safety, Medication Errors prescription, Drug Interactions, orginal articles from 2000 to October-2020 in the valid databases such as ISI web of Science PubMed Embase, Scopus and search engines like google was done. The included studies were based on the main objectives of the study and based on the inclusion criteria after several stages of review and quality evaluation. In fact, the main criteria for selecting articles were studies that compared the rate of medication errors with or without assessing the associated harms (real or potential) before and after the implementation of EMS. RESULTS: Out of 110 selected studies after initial screening, only 16 articles were selected due to their relevance. Among the final studies, there was a significant heterogeneity. Only 6 studies were of good quality. Of the 10 studies prescribing error rates, 9 reported reductions, but variable denominators prevented meta-analysis. Twelve studies provided specific examples of systemic drug errors. 5 cases reported their occurrence slightly. Out of 9 cases that analyzed the effects on drug error rate, 7 cases showed a significant relative reduction between 13 and 99%. Four of the six studies that analyzed the effects on potential ADEs showed a significant relative reduction of between 35 and 98%. Two of the four studies that analyzed the effect of ADEs showed a relative reduction of between 30 and 84%. CONCLUSION: Finally, e-prescribing seems to reduce the risk of medication errors and ADE. However, the studies differed significantly in terms of setting, design, quality and results. More randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to further improve the evidence of health informatics information.

[The assuring of rights of of medical workers within the framework of modernization of primary health care legislation].

The more active implementation of innovative medical technologies, digital transformation in medical sphere, sanction restrictions resulted in complication of already existed problems in medical law and raised new questions. The necessity in improving medical legislation is obvious. The number of lawsuits concerning medical organizations and medical workers is invariably increasing. Hence request of adoption of normative legal regulations and decisions supporting effective functioning of industry and protection of rights and interests of medical organizations and medical workers. The purpose of the research is to study and to analyze current issues of ensuring rights of medical workers as one of the main aspects of modernization of modern medical law. The main normative legal acts of modern medical law were studied. The analysis, comparison, generalization and systematization of published statistical data, judicial practice, national and foreign sources of scientific publications, devoted to topical issues of modernization of legislation regulating health care and rights of health workers were implemented. The content analysis was applied to acts regulating legal responsibility and protection of rights of medical workers. The protection of rights of physicians in system of medical care of population at the present stage was investigated. A number of problems related to legal regulation of activities of health workers was established. The proposals for its improvement was summarized. The legal regulation of medical care support by multitude of normative acts makes actual issues of systematization of normative documentation. the assignment of independent sector of medical law where legal status of medical worker is to become its main institute.

Choosing Wisely in clinical practice: Embracing critical thinking, striving for safer care.

In recent years, the Choosing Wisely and Less is More campaigns have gained growing attention in the medical scientific community. Several projects have been launched to facilitate confrontation among patients and physicians, to achieve better and harmless patient-centered care. Such initiatives have paved the way to a new "way of thinking." Embracing such a philosophy goes through a cognitive process that takes into account several issues. Medicine is a highly inaccurate science and physicians should deal with uncertainty. Evidence from the literature should not be accepted as it is but rather be translated into practice by medical practitioners who select treatment options for specific cases based on the best research, patient preferences, and individual patient characteristics. A wise choice requires active effort into minimizing the chance that potential biases may affect our clinical decisions. Potential harms and all consequences (both direct and indirect) of prescribing tests, procedures, or medications should be carefully evaluated, as well as patients' needs and preferences. Through such a cognitive process, a patient management shift is needed, moving from being centered on establishing a diagnosis towards finding the best management strategy for the right patient at the right time. Finally, while "thinking wisely," physicians should also "act wisely," being among the leading actors in facing upcoming healthcare challenges related to environmental issues and social discrepancies.

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Special Statement: Cognitive bias and medical error in obstetrics-challenges and opportunities.

The processes of diagnosis and management involve clinical decision-making. However, decision-making is often affected by cognitive biases that can lead to medical errors. This statement presents a framework of clinical thinking and decision-making and shows how these processes can be bias-prone. We review examples of cognitive bias in obstetrics and introduce debiasing tools and strategies. When an adverse event or near miss is reviewed, the concept of a cognitive autopsy-a root cause analysis of medical decision-making and the potential influence of cognitive biases-is promoted as part of the review process. Finally, areas for future research on cognitive bias in obstetrics are suggested.

Step, Error, and Event Frameworks in Endovascular Aortic Repair.

OBJECTIVE: Competency-based surgical education requires detailed and actionable feedback to ensure adequate and efficient skill development. Comprehensive operative capture systems such as the Operating Room Black Box (ORBB; Surgical Safety Technologies, Inc), which continuously records and synchronizes multiple sources of intraoperative data, have recently been integrated into hybrid rooms to provide targeted feedback to endovascular teams. The objective of this study is to develop step, error, and event frameworks to evaluate technical performance in elective endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) comprehensively captured by the ORBB (Surgical Safety Technologies, Inc; Toronto, Canada). METHODS: This study is based upon a modified Delphi consensus process to create evaluation frameworks for steps, errors, and events in EVAR. International experts from Vascular Surgery and Interventional Radiology were identified, based on their records of publications and invited presentations, or serving on relevant journal editorial boards. In an initial open-ended survey round, experts were asked to volunteer a comprehensive list of steps, errors, and events for a standard EVAR of an infrarenal aorto-iliac aneurysm (AAA). In subsequent survey rounds, the identified items were presented to the expert panel to rate on a 5-point Likert scale. Delphi survey rounds were repeated until the process reached consensus with a predefined agreement threshold (Cronbach α>0.7). The final frameworks were constructed with items achieving an agreement (responses of 4 or 5) from greater than 70% of experts. RESULTS: Of 98 invited proceduralists, 38 formed the expert consensus panel (39%), consisting of 29 vascular surgeons and 9 interventional radiologists, with 34% from North America and 66% from Europe. Consensus criteria were met following the third round of the Delphi consensus process (Cronbach α=0.82-0.93). There were 15, 32, and 25 items in the error, step, and event frameworks, respectively (within-item agreement=74%-100%). CONCLUSION: A detailed evaluation tool for the procedural steps, errors, and events in infrarenal EVAR was developed. This tool will be validated on recorded procedures in future work: It may focus skill development on common errors and hazardous steps. This tool might be used to provide high-quality feedback on technical performance of trainees and experienced surgeons alike, thus promoting surgical mastery.

Second Victim Experience and Perception Discordance of the Colonoscopic Perforation.

BACKGROUND: Perforation is the most serious adverse event of colonoscopy, but rarely considered from the view of colonoscopists' second victim experience and perception discordance between colonoscopists and patients. AIMS: We aimed to evaluate colonoscopists' second victim experience and the perception discordance between colonoscopists and patients for the colonoscopic perforation. METHODS: A survey for colonoscopic perforation was performed for the colonoscopists and outpatients who visited the university hospital between February 1, 2020, and April 30, 2020. The questionnaire included questions regarding colonoscopists' satisfaction for the intervention strategies offered to patients and patient-colonoscopist perception on colonoscopic perforation. A modified Korean version of the "Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (K-SVEST)" was used to assess the second victim experiences and supportive resources for the colonoscopists. RESULTS: Survey results from 160 colonoscopists and 165 patients were analyzed. The colonoscopists' satisfaction scores were higher for strategies related to sufficient explanation, empathy, courteous listening, and monetary compensation. The scores of the K-SVEST for the second victim experience were highest in psychological distress, followed by loss of professional self-efficacy, colleague support, physical distress, non-work-related support, institutional support, and turnover intentions/absenteeism. Significant patient-colonoscopist discordance was noted for the same colonoscopic perforation scenario on the judgment of medical error, health professionals' apology, monetary compensation, and criminal penalties for the colonoscopists. CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopists can suffer emotionally and physically from the second victim experience after colonoscopic perforation. In addition, the significant patient-colonoscopist discordance should be considered to make a better communication for the colonoscopic perforation.

North-African doctors as second victims of medical errors: a cross sectional survey.

INTRODUCTION: Physicians involved in medical errors (MEs) can experience loss of self-esteem and negative psychological experiences. They are called "second victims" of the ME. AIMS: To i) describe the profile, the types and the severity of MEs, and ii) explore the psychological impact on "second victims" to better understand how they cope. METHODS: It was a cross sectional retrospective study conducted from March to August 2018. All physicians working at Farhat Hached and Sahloul University hospitals were asked to complete a questionnaire about their possible MEs. The impact of MEs was evaluated using the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) (scoring, 0-88) (subscales ranges; intrusion, (0-32); avoidance, (0-32); hyperarousal, (0-24)). The diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was made when the total IES-R score exceeded 33. The coping strategies were evaluated using Ways of Coping Checklist Revised (WCC-R) scale (scoring, problem-focused, (10-40); emotion focused, (9-36); seeking social support, (8-32)). RESULTS: Among 393 responders, 268(68.2%) reported MEs. Wrong diagnosis (40.5%), faulty treatment (34.6%), preventive errors (13.5%) and faulty communication (6.4%) were the main frequent types of MEs. The most common related causes of MEs were inexperience (47.3%) and job overload (40.2%). The physicians' median (range) score of the IES-R was 19(0-69). According to the IES-R score, the most frequent psychological impacts were median (range): intrusion, 7(0-28) and avoidance symptoms, 7(0-24). PTSD symptoms affected 23.5% of physicians. Female sex and serious MEs were identified as predictors of PTSD. On the WCC-R check list, coping was balanced between the three coping strategies median (range), problem focused, 28.5(10-40); emotion-focused, 24(9-36) and seeking social support 21(8-32). CONCLUSION: There is a relatively high impact of ME within these North-African university hospital physicians. Coping was balanced within different three strategies as reported worldwide. Physicians adopted more likely constructive changes than defensive ones.

A Standardized Formulary to Reduce Pediatric Medication Dosing Errors: A Mixed Methods Study.

Objective: We hypothesized that implementation of a Medical Control Guideline (MCG) with a standardized formulary (fixed medication concentrations) and pre-calculated medication dosages in a large emergency medical services (EMS) system would reduce pediatric dosing errors. To assess the effectiveness of the standardized formulary to reduce errors, we chose to evaluate midazolam administration for seizures, because it is the most frequently dosed medication by EMS for children, and seizures are a time-sensitive condition. The objective of this study was to compare: 1) frequency of midazolam dosing errors during the field treatment of pediatric seizures and 2) paramedic anxiety and confidence in dosing midazolam for pediatric seizures, before and after implementation of the MCG.Methods: In this mixed-methods study, we utilized the Los Angeles County EMS data registry to identify pediatric patients ≤14 years-old treated with midazolam for seizure. We defined a dosing error as outside the dose directed by the color code on the length-based resuscitation tape, or ±20% the weight-based midazolam dose when color code was absent. We compared dosing errors during a two-year period before and after implementation of the MCG with the standardized formulary in February 2017. We surveyed paramedics to assess their level of anxiety and confidence in dosing midazolam and conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 respondents to further explore its impact on paramedic practice.Results: There were 80 dosing errors in 569 patients treated post-formulary (14.1%) compared with 92 dosing errors in 497 patients treated pre-formulary (18.5%), risk difference -4.5% (95% CI -8.9 to 0.0), p = 0.049. Among 304 paramedic survey respondents who had experience with the formulary, anxiety decreased (p < 0.001) and confidence increased (p < 0.001) post-formulary. Paramedics expressed the challenges of pediatric calls, the benefits of the MCG with the standardized formulary, and the ongoing challenges of pediatric medication dosing. Benefits included simplifying paramedic tasks, increasing paramedic self-efficacy, facilitating provider communication, and improving patient care.Conclusion: Implementation of a MCG with standardized formulary and pre-calculated medication dosing by weight reduced pediatric medication dosing errors and increased paramedic confidence in pediatric medication dosing. It may have the potential to facilitate patient care through improved communications and task simplification.

Can we learn from hidden mistakes? Self-fulfilling prophecy and responsible neuroprognostic innovation.

A self-fulfilling prophecy (SFP) in neuroprognostication occurs when a patient in coma is predicted to have a poor outcome, and life-sustaining treatment is withdrawn on the basis of that prediction, thus directly bringing about a poor outcome (viz. death) for that patient. In contrast to the predominant emphasis in the bioethics literature, we look beyond the moral issues raised by the possibility that an erroneous prediction might lead to the death of a patient who otherwise would have lived. Instead, we focus on the problematic epistemic consequences of neuroprognostic SFPs in settings where research and practice intersect. When this sort of SFP occurs, the problem is that physicians and researchers are never in a position to notice whether their original prognosis was correct or incorrect, since the patient dies anyway. Thus, SFPs keep us from discerning false positives from true positives, inhibiting proper assessment of novel prognostic tests. This epistemic problem of SFPs thus impedes learning, but ethical obligations of patient care make it difficult to avoid SFPs. We then show how the impediment to catching false positive indicators of poor outcome distorts research on novel techniques for neuroprognostication, allowing biases to persist in prognostic tests. We finally highlight a particular risk that a precautionary bias towards early withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment may be amplified. We conclude with guidelines about how researchers can mitigate the epistemic problems of SFPs, to achieve more responsible innovation of neuroprognostication for patients in coma.

Validation of the Danish version of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool.

OBJECTIVE: Health-care professionals (HCPs) who are involved in an unanticipated adverse patient event, a medical error or a patient-related injury can become second victims. Being a second victim can lead to various symptoms, affecting the well-being of HCPs and possible turnover intentions or absenteeism. An increasing number of hospitals have implemented a second-victim support programme. To achieve unique insights into what works and what does not work in second-victim support programmes, HCPs' perceptions are needed. The aim of this study was to translate the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST) into Danish and test the psychometric properties of the Danish version (D-SVEST). METHODS: The SVEST self-administered questionnaire was translated into Danish following the World Health Organization's guidelines. Assessments of the content validity, construct validity and internal consistency were performed based on 171 participants. RESULTS: The study demonstrated that the D-SVEST is content valid and fits the a priori defined structure. Yet, four items revealed unacceptable factor loadings (<0.4) and item-rest correlations <0.3. All Cronbach's alpha estimates for these five dimensions exceeded 0.70. The dimensions on colleague and institutional support did not contribute to the validity. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the D-SVEST is considered relevant and valid for measuring second-victim experiences and the adequacy of support resources. However, we recommend a modification of items 9 and 25 to enhance the measurement scale in a Danish context. The D-SVEST can be used by health-care management at Danish hospitals.

Psychosocial working conditions as determinants of concerns to have made important medical errors and possible intermediate factors of this association among medical assistants - a cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the association of psychosocial working conditions with concerns to have made important medical errors and to identify possible intermediate factors in this relationship. METHODS: We used data from 408 medical assistants (MAs) in Germany who participated in a 4-year prospective cohort study (follow-up period: 03-05/2021). Psychosocial working conditions were assessed at baseline by the effort-reward imbalance questionnaire and by a MA-specific questionnaire with seven subscales. MAs reported at follow-up whether they are concerned to have made an important medical error throughout the last 3 months, 12 months or since baseline (yes/no). These variables were merged into a single variable (any affirmative response vs. none) for primary analyses. Potential intermediate factors measured at baseline included work engagement (i.e., vigor and dedication, assessed by the UWES), work satisfaction (COPSOQ), depression (PHQ-2), anxiety (GAD-2) and self-rated health. We ran Poisson regression models with a log-link function to estimate relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Doing so, we employed the psychosocial working condition scales as continuous variables (i.e. z-scores) in the primary analyses. Potential intermediate factors were added separately to the regression models. RESULTS: Poor collaboration was the only working condition, which was significantly predictive of the concern of having made an important medical error (RR = 1.26, 95%CI = 1.00-1.57, p = 0.049). Partial intermediate factors in this association were vigor, depression and anxiety. CONCLUSION: We found weak and mostly statistically non-significant associations. The only exception was poor collaboration whose association with concerns to have made an important medical error was partially explained by vigor and poor mental health.

Cognitive biases encountered by physicians in the emergency room.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic errors constitute an important medical safety problem that needs improvement, and their frequency and severity are high in emergency room settings. Previous studies have suggested that diagnostic errors occur in 0.6-12% of first-time patients in the emergency room and that one or more cognitive factors are involved in 96% of these cases. This study aimed to identify the types of cognitive biases experienced by physicians in emergency rooms in Japan. METHODS: We conducted a questionnaire survey using Nikkei Medical Online (Internet) from January 21 to January 31, 2019. Of the 159,519 physicians registered with Nikkei Medical Online when the survey was administered, those who volunteered their most memorable diagnostic error cases in the emergency room participated in the study. EZR was used for the statistical analyses. RESULTS: A total of 387 physicians were included. The most common cognitive biases were overconfidence (22.5%), confirmation (21.2%), availability (12.4%), and anchoring (11.4%). Of the error cases, the top five most common initial diagnoses were upper gastrointestinal disease (22.7%), trauma (14.7%), cardiovascular disease (10.9%), respiratory disease (7.5%), and primary headache (6.5%). The corresponding final diagnoses for these errors were intestinal obstruction or peritonitis (27.3%), overlooked traumas (47.4%), other cardiovascular diseases (66.7%), cardiovascular disease (41.4%), and stroke (80%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A comparison of the initial and final diagnoses of cases with diagnostic errors shows that there were more cases with diagnostic errors caused by overlooking another disease in the same organ or a disease in a closely related organ.

The impact of nurses' perceptions of systems thinking on occurrence and reporting of adverse events: A cross-sectional study.

AIMS: To assess systems thinking level and its relationship with occurrence and reporting of adverse events in Iranian nurses. BACKGROUND: Systems thinking has recently emerged as an important element of patient safety and quality improvement in health care systems. It helps health care professionals to understand the different elements of health care systems, the interrelatedness and interdependencies of these elements in the health care systems. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was carried out in 10 teaching hospitals in Tehran, Iran. A total of 511 nurses were selected using simple random sampling. Systems thinking was measured using the validated Systems Thinking Scale. Data analysis was performed by descriptive analyses, independent t test and logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The average score for total systems thinking was a mean of 49.45 (SD = 12.10; range 0-80). In total, 67.5% of participants reported the experience of the occurrence of adverse events leading to harm to patients, and 65.2% of them responded as having appropriate adverse events reporting behaviours. Nurses who had higher scores in systems thinking were found to be more likely to report adverse events (odds ratio = 1.07; 95% CI = 1.05-1.09), whereas they were less prone to experience adverse events (odds ratio = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.95-0.98). CONCLUSION: Our results indicated that the nurses' systems thinking level was moderate. Systems thinking had a significant role in preventing the occurrence of adverse events as well as improving the reporting of adverse events. Therefore, it is recommended to enhance the competency of nurses' systems thinking to prevent the occurrence of adverse events and to improve the reporting of adverse events. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Nursing managers need to focus on the systems thinking weaknesses and the occurrence and the reporting of adverse events in policymaking, practice and research. Also, systems thinking should be integrated with the health care system for preventing the occurrence of adverse events and improving reporting of adverse events. They should support, lead and allocate the essential pragmatic strategies and resources for the involvement of all health care members in policymaking.

Workplace bullying, occupational burnout, work-life imbalance and perceived medical errors among nurses in Oman: A cluster analysis.

AIM: To explore whether different profiles exist in a cohort of nurses regarding demographic and occupational outcomes. BACKGROUND: Nurses will face many occupational problems, including workplace bullying, work-life imbalance, burnout and medical errors. METHODS: A cross-sectional study included 232 nurses working in a hospital in Oman. Data were collected from December 2018 to April 2019 using convenience sampling. Instruments included work-life balance questions, the Negative Acts questionnaire-revised questionnaire, Oldenburg Burnout Inventory and Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index. Cluster analysis, t test, chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests were used for data analysis. RESULTS: Cluster 1 (n = 108) was characterized as 'low-risk on medical error, burnout and workplace bullying but high-risk in work-life imbalance' group. Cluster 2 (n = 124) was labelled as 'high-risk on medical error, work-life imbalance, burnout and workplace buying' group. CONCLUSIONS: Two groups of nurses in Oman are facing occupational problems differently. Nurses in Cluster 1 need attention to work-life imbalance. However, nurses in Cluster 2 need attention on all occupational problems. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Findings call on the nursing stakeholders in Oman to identify factors related to occupational problems, to provide consultation services to reduce inter-personnel conflicts, and to review nurses' working hours to avoid burnout and resume a balanced work-life.