We use cookies to understand how you use our site and to improve your experience. This includes personalizing content and advertising. To learn more, click here. By continuing to use our site, you accept our use of cookies. Cookie Policy.

Features Partner Sites Information LinkXpress hp
Sign In
Advertise with Us
GLOBETECH PUBLISHING LLC

Download Mobile App




Physicians Avoid Online Error-Reporting Tools Because of Embarrassment

By MedImaging International staff writers
Posted on 25 Oct 2011
Print article
“Too busy,” and “too complicated” are the typical excuses one might expect when medical professionals are asked why they fail to use online error-reporting systems designed to improve patient safety and the quality of care. But investigators found instead that the most typical reason among radiation oncologists was fear of getting into trouble and embarrassment.

Johns Hopkins University (Baltimore, MD, USA) investigators e-mailed an anonymous survey to physicians, nurses, radiation physicists and other radiation specialists at Johns Hopkins University, North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health System (Great Neck, NY, USA), Washington University in St. Louis (MO, USA), and the University of Miami (FL, USA), with questions about their reporting near-misses and errors in delivering radiotherapy. Each of the four centers tracks near misses and errors through online, intradepartmental systems. Some 274 providers returned completed surveys.

According to the survey, few nurses and physicians reported routinely submitting online reports, in contrast to physicists, dosimetrists, and radiation therapists who reported the most use of error and near-miss reporting systems. Almost all respondents agreed that error reporting is their responsibility. Getting colleagues into trouble, liability and embarrassment in front of colleagues were reported most frequently by physicians and residents.

More than 90% of respondents had observed near misses or errors in their clinical practice. The vast majority of these were reported as near misses as opposed to errors, and, as a result, no providers reported patient harm. Hospitals have specific systems for reporting errors, but few have systems to accommodate the complex data associated with radiotherapy.

“It is important to understand the specific reasons why fewer physicians participate in these reporting systems so that hospitals can work to close this gap. Reporting is not an end in itself. It helps identify potential hazards, and each member of the health care team brings a perspective that can help make patients safer,” said Johns Hopkins radiation oncology resident Kendra Harris, MD, who presented an abstract of the data at the 53rd annual meeting of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), held October 2011 in Miami, FL, USA.

The up side, according to Dr. Harris, is that few respondents reported being too busy to report or that the online tool was too complicated. “Respondents recognized that error events should be reported and that they should claim responsibility for them. The barriers we identified are not insurmountable,” she added.

Dr. Harris reported that online reporting systems should be simple and promoted as quality improvement tools, not instruments for placing blame and meting out sanctions. “These systems should not be viewed as punitive; rather, they’re a critical way to improve therapy,” she stated. “You can’t manage what you can’t measure.”

Most of the respondents said they would participate in a national reporting system for radiotherapy near misses and errors. “A national system that collects pooled data about near-misses and errors, which are thankfully rare, may help us identify common trends and implement safety interventions to improve care,” added Dr. Harris.

Related Links:
Johns Hopkins University


New
Gold Member
X-Ray QA Meter
T3 AD Pro
New
Digital X-Ray Detector Panel
Acuity G4
Opaque X-Ray Mobile Lead Barrier
2594M
Radiation Therapy Treatment Software Application
Elekta ONE

Print article
Radcal

Channels

Radiography

view channel
Image: The new X-ray detector produces a high-quality radiograph (Photo courtesy of ACS Central Science 2024, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci.4c01296)

Highly Sensitive, Foldable Detector to Make X-Rays Safer

X-rays are widely used in diagnostic testing and industrial monitoring, from dental checkups to airport luggage scans. However, these high-energy rays emit ionizing radiation, which can pose risks after... Read more

MRI

view channel
Image: Artificial intelligence models can be trained to distinguish brain tumors from healthy tissue (Photo courtesy of 123RF)

AI Can Distinguish Brain Tumors from Healthy Tissue

Researchers have made significant advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) for medical applications. AI holds particular promise in radiology, where delays in processing medical images can often postpone... Read more

Nuclear Medicine

view channel
Image: Example of AI analysis of PET/CT images (Photo courtesy of Academic Radiology; DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2024.08.043)

AI Analysis of PET/CT Images Predicts Side Effects of Immunotherapy in Lung Cancer

Immunotherapy has significantly advanced the treatment of primary lung cancer, but it can sometimes lead to a severe side effect known as interstitial lung disease. This condition is characterized by lung... Read more

General/Advanced Imaging

view channel
Image: Cleerly offers an AI-enabled CCTA solution for personalized, precise and measurable assessment of plaque, stenosis and ischemia (Photo courtesy of Cleerly)

AI-Enabled Plaque Assessments Help Cardiologists Identify High-Risk CAD Patients

Groundbreaking research has shown that a non-invasive, artificial intelligence (AI)-based analysis of cardiac computed tomography (CT) can predict severe heart-related events in patients exhibiting symptoms... Read more
Copyright © 2000-2024 Globetech Media. All rights reserved.