{"title":"Public perceptions of reportable safety events and risks in United States primary care","authors":"Frances Hardin-Fanning, Said Abusalem, Paul Clark","doi":"10.1016/j.jsr.2024.08.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><em>Introduction:</em> Patients may not feel responsible for reporting safety events, and social norms may prevent patients from questioning health care providers’ judgment. There is a paucity of research regarding public awareness of reportable safety events/risks. Educating the public about reporting is paramount in error prevention. Because more than 70% of errors (e.g., errors in diagnosis, communication errors, unsafe medication practices, and care fragmentation) occur in primary care settings, the purpose of this study was to explore public perceptions of when to report safety events/risks in these settings. <em>Method:</em> System-level primary and outpatient facility safety incident scenarios conducive to safety events/risk reporting were developed and administered via online survey methodology. Following completion of the scenario questions, participants were asked a single open-text item: “As you were reading the scenarios above, what did you think makes an event/risk ‘reportable’?” <em>Results:</em> At least one-third of participants responded incorrectly in 70% of the scenarios. The percentage of incorrect responses ranged from 5.2% to 62.3% with “unwitnessed falls” and “nursing scope of practice” queries incorrectly reported at 44.5% and 53.9%, respectively. Rationales for inappropriate events/risk reporting included “risk prediction at the management/system level,” “legal repercussions/protection (e.g., negligence, legal responsibility to patient),” “violations of scope of practice/professional expectations,” “degree of potential/actual lethality,” and “personnel errors.” <em>Conclusion:</em> This study revealed a gap between understanding why to report an event/risk and when to correctly report (or not report) an actual healthcare issue. <em>Practical applications:</em> Awareness of reasons for correctly reporting incidents and how correct reporting builds a culture of safety needs to be strengthened.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Safety Research","volume":"91 ","pages":"Pages 150-155"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Safety Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022437524001051","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ERGONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Patients may not feel responsible for reporting safety events, and social norms may prevent patients from questioning health care providers’ judgment. There is a paucity of research regarding public awareness of reportable safety events/risks. Educating the public about reporting is paramount in error prevention. Because more than 70% of errors (e.g., errors in diagnosis, communication errors, unsafe medication practices, and care fragmentation) occur in primary care settings, the purpose of this study was to explore public perceptions of when to report safety events/risks in these settings. Method: System-level primary and outpatient facility safety incident scenarios conducive to safety events/risk reporting were developed and administered via online survey methodology. Following completion of the scenario questions, participants were asked a single open-text item: “As you were reading the scenarios above, what did you think makes an event/risk ‘reportable’?” Results: At least one-third of participants responded incorrectly in 70% of the scenarios. The percentage of incorrect responses ranged from 5.2% to 62.3% with “unwitnessed falls” and “nursing scope of practice” queries incorrectly reported at 44.5% and 53.9%, respectively. Rationales for inappropriate events/risk reporting included “risk prediction at the management/system level,” “legal repercussions/protection (e.g., negligence, legal responsibility to patient),” “violations of scope of practice/professional expectations,” “degree of potential/actual lethality,” and “personnel errors.” Conclusion: This study revealed a gap between understanding why to report an event/risk and when to correctly report (or not report) an actual healthcare issue. Practical applications: Awareness of reasons for correctly reporting incidents and how correct reporting builds a culture of safety needs to be strengthened.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Safety Research is an interdisciplinary publication that provides for the exchange of ideas and scientific evidence capturing studies through research in all areas of safety and health, including traffic, workplace, home, and community. This forum invites research using rigorous methodologies, encourages translational research, and engages the global scientific community through various partnerships (e.g., this outreach includes highlighting some of the latest findings from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).