OBJECTIVE: To describe how Italian clinicians disclose medical errors with clear and shared lines of responsibility.To describe how Italian clinicians disclose medical errors with clear and shared lines of responsibility. METHODS: Thirty-eight volunteers were video-recorded in a simulated conversation while communicating a medical error to a simulated family member (SFM). They were assigned to a clear responsibility error scenario or a shared responsibility one. Simulations were coded for: mention of the term "error" and apology; communication content and affect using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. SFMs rated their willingness to have the patient continue care with the clinician. RESULTS: Clinicians referred to an error and/or apologized in 55% of the simulations. The error was disclosed more frequently in the clear responsibility scenario (p<0.02). When the "error" was explicitly mentioned, the SFM was more attentive, sad and anxious (p≤0.05) and less willing to have the patient continue care (p<0.05). Communication was more patient-centered (p<0.05) and affectively dynamic with the SFMs showing greater anxiety, sadness, attentiveness and respectfulness in the clear responsibility scenario (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Disclosing errors is not a common practice in Italy. Clinicians disclose less frequently when responsibility is shared and indicative of a system failure. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Training programs to improve disclosure practice considering the type of error committed should be implemented.

Error disclosure and family members' reactions : does the type of error really matter? / D. Leone, G. Lamiani, E. Vegni, S. Larson, D.L. Roter. - In: PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING. - ISSN 0738-3991. - 98:4(2015 Apr 13), pp. 446-452. [10.1016/j.pec.2014.12.011]

Error disclosure and family members' reactions : does the type of error really matter?

D. Leone
Primo
;
G. Lamiani
Secondo
;
E. Vegni;
2015

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe how Italian clinicians disclose medical errors with clear and shared lines of responsibility.To describe how Italian clinicians disclose medical errors with clear and shared lines of responsibility. METHODS: Thirty-eight volunteers were video-recorded in a simulated conversation while communicating a medical error to a simulated family member (SFM). They were assigned to a clear responsibility error scenario or a shared responsibility one. Simulations were coded for: mention of the term "error" and apology; communication content and affect using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. SFMs rated their willingness to have the patient continue care with the clinician. RESULTS: Clinicians referred to an error and/or apologized in 55% of the simulations. The error was disclosed more frequently in the clear responsibility scenario (p<0.02). When the "error" was explicitly mentioned, the SFM was more attentive, sad and anxious (p≤0.05) and less willing to have the patient continue care (p<0.05). Communication was more patient-centered (p<0.05) and affectively dynamic with the SFMs showing greater anxiety, sadness, attentiveness and respectfulness in the clear responsibility scenario (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Disclosing errors is not a common practice in Italy. Clinicians disclose less frequently when responsibility is shared and indicative of a system failure. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Training programs to improve disclosure practice considering the type of error committed should be implemented.
Apology; Medical error; RIAS; Simulation; Truth disclosure
Settore M-PSI/08 - Psicologia Clinica
13-apr-2015
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
1-s2.0-S0738399115000038-main.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 336.56 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
336.56 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/266199
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 8
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 6
social impact