HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Rapid Responses: Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Van Vorst, R. F. Articles by Westfall, J. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Van Vorst, R. F. Articles by Westfall, J. M. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Rural Community Members’ Perceptions of Harm from Medical Mistakes: A High Plains Research Network (HPRN) Study

Foundation for Health Living, Latham, NY (RFV)
Department of Family Medicine, University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center, Aurora, CO (RA-G, DF, JMW)
HPRN Community Advisory Council, Northeastern Junior College, Sterling, CO (MF)
Department of Family Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH (NE)
JSI Research and Training Institute, Denver, CO (CD)

Correspondence: Corresponding author: Rebecca F. Van Vorst, MSPH, Foundation for Healthy Living, 30 Century Hill Dr, Latham, NY 12110 (E-mail: vanvorst.rebecca{at}foundationforhealthyliving.org)

Objective: The aim of this study was to learn about community members’ definitions and types of harm from medical mistakes.

Methods: Mixed methods study using community-based participatory research (CBPR). The High Plains Research Network (HPRN) with its Community Advisory Council (CAC) designed and distributed an anonymous survey through local community newspapers. Survey included open-ended questions on patients’ experiences with medical mistakes and resultant harm. Qualitative analysis was performed by CAC and research team members on mistake descriptions and types of reported harm. Patient Safety Taxonomy coding was performed on a subset of surveys that contained actual medical errors.

Results: A total of 286 surveys were returned, with 172 respondents (60%) reporting a total of 180 perceived medical mistakes. Quantitative analysis showed that 41% of perceived mistakes (n = 73) involved only unanticipated outcomes. Reported types of harm included emotional, financial, and physical harm. Reports suggest that perceived clinician indifference to unanticipated outcomes may lead to patients’ loss of trust and belief that the unexpected outcome was a result of an error.

Discussion: CBPR methodology is an important strategy to design and implement a community-based survey. Community members reported experiencing medical mistakes, most with harmful outcomes. The response they received by the medical community may have influenced their perception of mistake and harm.

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. M. Westfall, L. J. Fagnan, M. Handley, J. Salsberg, P. McGinnis, L. K. Zittleman, and A. C. Macaulay Practice-based Research is Community Engagement J Am Board Fam Med, July 1, 2009; 22(4): 423 - 427. [Full Text] [PDF]