PURPOSE Current research on errors in health care focuses almost exclusively on system and clinician error. It tends to exclude how patients may create errors that influence their health. We aimed to identify the types of errors that patients can contribute and help manage, especially in primary care

Buetow, Stephen

Dovey, Susan

Elwyn, Glyn

Kenealy, Tim

Kiata, Liz

Liew, Tess

Annals of Family Medicine

PubMed

PURPOSE Current research on errors in health care focuses almost exclusively on system and clinician error. It tends to exclude how patients may create errors that influence their health. We aimed to identify the types of errors that patients can contribute and help manage, especially in primary care. 

METHODS Eleven nominal group interviews of patients and primary health care professionals were held in Auckland, New Zealand, during late 2007. Group members reported and helped to classify types of potential error by patients. We synthesized the ideas that emerged from the nominal groups into a taxonomy of patient error. 

RESULTS Our taxonomy is a 3-level system encompassing 70 potential types of patient error. The first level classifies 8 categories of error into 2 main groups: action errors and mental errors. The action errors, which result in part or whole from patient behavior, are attendance errors, assertion errors, and adherence errors. The mental errors, which are errors in patient thought processes, comprise memory errors, mindfulness errors, misjudgments, and-more distally-knowledge deficits and attitudes not conducive to health. 

CONCLUSION The taxonomy is an early attempt to understand and recognize how patients may err and what clinicians should aim to influence so they can help patients act safely. This approach begins to balance perspectives on error but requires further research. There is a need to move beyond seeing patient, clinician, and system errors as separate categories of error. An important next step may be research that attempts to understand how patients, clinicians, and systems interact to cocreate and reduce errors.sch_nur7pub4165pub

Buetow, Stephen A.

Kiata, L.

Liew, T.

Kenealy, T.

Dovey, S.

Elwyn, G.

Queen Margaret University eTheses

The Annals of Family Medicine

Patient Error: A Preliminary Taxonomy

PURPOSE Current research on errors in health care focuses almost exclusively on

system and clinician error. It tends to exclude how patients may create errors that

infl uence their health. We aimed to identify the types of errors that patients can

contribute and help manage, especially in primary care.

METHODS Eleven nominal group interviews of patients and primary health care

professionals were held in Auckland, New Zealand, during late 2007. Group

members reported and helped to classify types of potential error by patients. We

synthesized the ideas that emerged from the nominal groups into a taxonomy of

patient error.

RESULTS Our taxonomy is a 3-level system encompassing 70 potential types of

patient error. The fi rst level classifi es 8 categories of error into 2 main groups:

action errors and mental errors. The action errors, which result in part or whole

from patient behavior, are attendance errors, assertion errors, and adherence

errors. The mental errors, which are errors in patient thought processes, comprise

memory errors, mindfulness errors, misjudgments, and—more distally—

knowledge defi cits and attitudes not conducive to health.

CONCLUSION The taxonomy is an early attempt to understand and recognize

how patients may err and what clinicians should aim to infl uence so they can

help patients act safely. This approach begins to balance perspectives on error

but requires further research. There is a need to move beyond seeing patient,

clinician, and system errors as separate categories of error. An important next

step may be research that attempts to understand how patients, clinicians, and

systems interact to cocreate and reduce errors

Online Research @ Cardiff

Patient error: a preliminary taxonomy

Queen Margaret University eResearch

PURPOSE Current research on errors in health care focuses almost exclusively on system and clinician error. It tends to exclude how patients may create errors that influence their health. We aimed to identify the types of errors that patients can contribute and help manage, especially in primary care. METHODS Eleven nominal group interviews of patients and primary health care professionals were held in Auckland, New Zealand, during late 2007. Group members reported and helped to classify types of potential error by patients. We synthesized the ideas that emerged from the nominal groups into a taxonomy of patient error. RESULTS Our taxonomy is a 3-level system encompassing 70 potential types of patient error. The first level classifies 8 categories of error into 2 main groups: action errors and mental errors. The action errors, which result in part or whole from patient behavior, are attendance errors, assertion errors, and adherence errors. The mental errors, which are errors in patient thought processes, comprise memory errors, mindfulness errors, misjudgments, and—more distally—knowledge deficits and attitudes not conducive to health. CONCLUSION The taxonomy is an early attempt to understand and recognize how patients may err and what clinicians should aim to influence so they can help patients act safely. This approach begins to balance perspectives on error but requires further research. There is a need to move beyond seeing patient, clinician, and system errors as separate categories of error. An important next step may be research that attempts to understand how patients, clinicians, and systems interact to cocreate and reduce errors

Kiata-Holland, Elizabeth

Queensland University of Technology ePrints Archive

PURPOSE Current research on errors in health care focuses almost exclusively on system and clinician error. It tends to exclude how patients may create errors that influence their health. We aimed to identify the types of errors that patients can contribute and help manage, especially in primary care. \ud
\ud
METHODS Eleven nominal group interviews of patients and primary health care professionals were held in Auckland, New Zealand, during late 2007. Group members reported and helped to classify types of potential error by patients. We synthesized the ideas that emerged from the nominal groups into a taxonomy of patient error. \ud
\ud
RESULTS Our taxonomy is a 3-level system encompassing 70 potential types of patient error. The first level classifies 8 categories of error into 2 main groups: action errors and mental errors. The action errors, which result in part or whole from patient behavior, are attendance errors, assertion errors, and adherence errors. The mental errors, which are errors in patient thought processes, comprise memory errors, mindfulness errors, misjudgments, and—more distally—knowledge deficits and attitudes not conducive to health. \ud
\ud
CONCLUSION The taxonomy is an early attempt to understand and recognize how patients may err and what clinicians should aim to influence so they can help patients act safely. This approach begins to balance perspectives on error but requires further research. There is a need to move beyond seeing patient, clinician, and system errors as separate categories of error. An important next step may be research that attempts to understand how patients, clinicians, and systems interact to cocreate and reduce errors

Buetow, Stephen A

Name not available

PURPOSE \ud
\ud
Current research on errors in health care focuses almost exclusively on system and clinician error. It tends to exclude how patients may create errors that influence their health. We aimed to identify the types of errors that patients can contribute and help manage, especially in primary care. \ud
\ud
METHODS \ud
\ud
Eleven nominal group interviews of patients and primary health care professionals were held in Auckland, New Zealand, during late 2007. Group members reported and helped to classify types of potential error by patients. We synthesized the ideas that emerged from the nominal groups into a taxonomy of patient error. \ud
\ud
RESULTS \ud
\ud
Our taxonomy is a 3-level system encompassing 70 potential types of patient error. The first level classifies 8 categories of error into 2 main groups: action errors and mental errors. The action errors, which result in part or whole from patient behavior, are attendance errors, assertion errors, and adherence errors. The mental errors, which are errors in patient thought processes, comprise memory errors, mindfulness errors, misjudgments, and—more distally—knowledge deficits and attitudes not conducive to health. \ud
\ud
CONCLUSION \ud
\ud
The taxonomy is an early attempt to understand and recognize how patients may err and what clinicians should aim to influence so they can help patients act safely. This approach begins to balance perspectives on error but requires further research. There is a need to move beyond seeing patient, clinician, and system errors as separate categories of error. An important next step may be research that attempts to understand how patients, clinicians, and systems interact to cocreate and reduce errors

Dovey, Sue

Patient error : a preliminary taxonomy

Contains fulltext :
                  81865.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)PURPOSE: Current research on errors in health care focuses almost exclusively on system and clinician error. It tends to exclude how patients may create errors that influence their health. We aimed to identify the types of errors that patients can contribute and help manage, especially in primary care. METHODS: Eleven nominal group interviews of patients and primary health care professionals were held in Auckland, New Zealand, during late 2007. Group members reported and helped to classify types of potential error by patients. We synthesized the ideas that emerged from the nominal groups into a taxonomy of patient error. RESULTS: Our taxonomy is a 3-level system encompassing 70 potential types of patient error. The first level classifies 8 categories of error into 2 main groups: action errors and mental errors. The action errors, which result in part or whole from patient behavior, are attendance errors, assertion errors, and adherence errors. The mental errors, which are errors in patient thought processes, comprise memory errors, mindfulness errors, misjudgments, and-more distally-knowledge deficits and attitudes not conducive to health. CONCLUSION: The taxonomy is an early attempt to understand and recognize how patients may err and what clinicians should aim to influence so they can help patients act safely. This approach begins to balance perspectives on error but requires further research. There is a need to move beyond seeing patient, clinician, and system errors as separate categories of error. An important next step may be research that attempts to understand how patients, clinicians, and systems interact to cocreate and reduce errors

Buetow, S.

Radboud Repository

Patient error: a preliminary taxonomy.

Patient Error: A Preliminary Taxonomy

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Queen Margaret University eTheses

Online Research @ Cardiff

Queen Margaret University eResearch

Queensland University of Technology ePrints Archive

Name not available

Name not available

Radboud Repository