Mark Schlesinger, Isha Dhingra, Barbara A Fain, Julia C Prentice, Vinita Parkash
{"title":"不良事件与被遗弃感:从患者对医疗事故的描述中学习。","authors":"Mark Schlesinger, Isha Dhingra, Barbara A Fain, Julia C Prentice, Vinita Parkash","doi":"10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002848","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adverse medical events affect 10% of American households annually, inducing a variety of harms and attitudinal changes. The impact of adverse events on perceived abandonment by patients and their care partners has not been methodically assessed.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify ways in which providers, patients and families responded to medical mishaps, linking these qualitatively and statistically to reported feelings of abandonment and sequelae induced by perceived abandonment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Mixed-methods analysis of responses to the Massachusetts Medical Errors Recontact survey with participants reporting a medical error within the past 5 years. The survey consisted of forty closed and open-ended questions examining adverse medical events and their consequences. Respondents were asked whether they felt 'that the doctors abandoned or betrayed you or your family'. Open-ended responses were analysed with a coding schema by two clinician coders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 253 respondents, 34.5% initially and 20% persistently experienced abandonment. Perceived abandonment could be traced to interactions before (18%), during (34%) and after (45%) the medical mishap. Comprehensive post-incident communication reduced abandonment for patients staying with the provider associated with the mishap. However, 68.4% of patients perceiving abandonment left their original provider; for them, post-error communication did not increase the probability of resolution. Abandonment accounted for half the post-event loss of trust in clinicians.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Survey-based data may under-report the impact of perceived errors on vulnerable populations. Moreover, patients may not be cognizant of all forms of adverse events or all sequelae to those events. Our data were drawn from a single state and time period.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Addressing the deleterious impact of persisting abandonment merits attention in programmes responding to patient safety concerns. Enhancing patient engagement in the aftermath of an adverse medical event has the potential to reinforce therapeutic alliances between patients and their subsequent clinicians.</p>","PeriodicalId":9052,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Quality","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11331972/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adverse events and perceived abandonment: learning from patients' accounts of medical mishaps.\",\"authors\":\"Mark Schlesinger, Isha Dhingra, Barbara A Fain, Julia C Prentice, Vinita Parkash\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002848\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adverse medical events affect 10% of American households annually, inducing a variety of harms and attitudinal changes. The impact of adverse events on perceived abandonment by patients and their care partners has not been methodically assessed.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify ways in which providers, patients and families responded to medical mishaps, linking these qualitatively and statistically to reported feelings of abandonment and sequelae induced by perceived abandonment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Mixed-methods analysis of responses to the Massachusetts Medical Errors Recontact survey with participants reporting a medical error within the past 5 years. The survey consisted of forty closed and open-ended questions examining adverse medical events and their consequences. Respondents were asked whether they felt 'that the doctors abandoned or betrayed you or your family'. Open-ended responses were analysed with a coding schema by two clinician coders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 253 respondents, 34.5% initially and 20% persistently experienced abandonment. Perceived abandonment could be traced to interactions before (18%), during (34%) and after (45%) the medical mishap. Comprehensive post-incident communication reduced abandonment for patients staying with the provider associated with the mishap. However, 68.4% of patients perceiving abandonment left their original provider; for them, post-error communication did not increase the probability of resolution. Abandonment accounted for half the post-event loss of trust in clinicians.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Survey-based data may under-report the impact of perceived errors on vulnerable populations. Moreover, patients may not be cognizant of all forms of adverse events or all sequelae to those events. Our data were drawn from a single state and time period.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Addressing the deleterious impact of persisting abandonment merits attention in programmes responding to patient safety concerns. Enhancing patient engagement in the aftermath of an adverse medical event has the potential to reinforce therapeutic alliances between patients and their subsequent clinicians.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9052,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Open Quality\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11331972/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Open Quality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002848\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Quality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002848","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Adverse events and perceived abandonment: learning from patients' accounts of medical mishaps.
Background: Adverse medical events affect 10% of American households annually, inducing a variety of harms and attitudinal changes. The impact of adverse events on perceived abandonment by patients and their care partners has not been methodically assessed.
Objective: To identify ways in which providers, patients and families responded to medical mishaps, linking these qualitatively and statistically to reported feelings of abandonment and sequelae induced by perceived abandonment.
Methods: Mixed-methods analysis of responses to the Massachusetts Medical Errors Recontact survey with participants reporting a medical error within the past 5 years. The survey consisted of forty closed and open-ended questions examining adverse medical events and their consequences. Respondents were asked whether they felt 'that the doctors abandoned or betrayed you or your family'. Open-ended responses were analysed with a coding schema by two clinician coders.
Results: Of the 253 respondents, 34.5% initially and 20% persistently experienced abandonment. Perceived abandonment could be traced to interactions before (18%), during (34%) and after (45%) the medical mishap. Comprehensive post-incident communication reduced abandonment for patients staying with the provider associated with the mishap. However, 68.4% of patients perceiving abandonment left their original provider; for them, post-error communication did not increase the probability of resolution. Abandonment accounted for half the post-event loss of trust in clinicians.
Limitations: Survey-based data may under-report the impact of perceived errors on vulnerable populations. Moreover, patients may not be cognizant of all forms of adverse events or all sequelae to those events. Our data were drawn from a single state and time period.
Conclusion: Addressing the deleterious impact of persisting abandonment merits attention in programmes responding to patient safety concerns. Enhancing patient engagement in the aftermath of an adverse medical event has the potential to reinforce therapeutic alliances between patients and their subsequent clinicians.