Exploration of students' reaction in medical error events and the impact of personalized training on the speaking-up behavior in medical error events.

BACKGROUND: The ability of medical students to speak up before a medical error occurs is a timely and necessary interaction to prevent potential patient harm. As it may be crucial to improve patient safety, we explored how medical students react to a medical error and provided them appropriate training regarding speaking up about medical issues. METHODS: A quasi-experimental study was conducted in Taiwan involving 153 medical students who participated in a speaking-up simulation course. They were divided into two groups. The first group participated in a non-life-threatening scenario before the intervention, followed by a personalized debriefing session, then a life-threatening scenario after the intervention. The second group participated in a life-threatening scenario before the intervention, followed by a personalized debriefing session, then a non-life-threatening scenario after the intervention. Students also completed patient safety attitude survey. RESULTS: During the preintervention scenario, the overall medical students' speaking-up rate to medical error was 45.1%. The speaking-up rate of medical students in life-threatening scenario was significantly higher than the rate in non-life-threatening scenario before the intervention (64.6% vs 24.3%, p < 0.001). After personalized debriefing, the speaking-up rate to medical errors was significantly improved both in life-threatening scenarios (95.9%, p < 0.001) and in non-life-threatening scenarios (100%, p < 0.001). Male medical students had significantly higher speaking-up rates than female students in life-threatening scenario (76.2% vs 51.4%, p = 0.02). On post-intervention surveys, students provided several reasons for their likelihood of speaking up or remaining silent during a medical error event. CONCLUSIONS: Medical students' rate of speaking-up to medical error was higher in a simulated life-threatening scenario than in a simulated non-life-threatening scenario. Faculty-led personalized debriefing can facilitate medical students' adoption of communication strategies to speak up more in medical error events. Educators should also consider gender differences when they design effective assertive communication courses.[Box: see text].

Factors associated with medical students speaking-up about medical errors: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Training medical students to speak up when they witness a potential error is an important competency for patient safety, but details regarding the barriers that prevent medical students from effectively communicating are lacking. Therefore, this study aimed at exploring the factors affecting medical students' willingness to speak up for patient safety when a medical error was observed. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study at a medical university in Taiwan, and 151 medical students in clinical clerkship completed a survey including demographic characteristics, conflict of interests/social relationship, personal capability, and personality and characteristics of senior staff domains. Data were analyzed using t-test. RESULTS: Three of five items in the conflict of interests/social relationship domain showed statistically significant importance, including 'I am afraid of being punished' (Mean difference, MD = 0.37; p < 0.01), 'I do not want to break unspoken rules' (MD = 0.55; p < 0.01), and 'I do not want to have bad team relationship' (MD = 0.58; p < 0.01). Two items (perception of knowledge/understanding and communication skills) in the personal capability domain were significantly important to speaking up. Six of 10 items in personality and characteristics of senior staff domain were rated significantly important in deciding to speak up. The top three factors of them were senior personnel with 'Grumpy' personality (MD = 1.20; p < 0.01), 'hierarchy gap' (MD = 1.12; p < 0.01), and senior personnel with 'Stubborn' personality (MD = 1.06; p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrated medical students' perspectives on barriers to speaking up in the event of medical error. Some factors related to characteristics of senior staff could compromise medical students' ability to speak up in the event of medical error. These results might be important for medical educators in designing personalized educational activities related to medical students' ability to speak up for patient safety.