Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30935883›Full record

ArticleJoint Commission journal on quality and patient safety2019

Using Incident Reports to Assess Communication Failures and Patient Outcomes.

Elizabeth Umberfield, Amir A Ghaferi, Sarah L Krein, Milisa Manojlovich

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Identifying and Comparing Communication Challenges Between Nurses and Resident Physicians.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Elizabeth Umberfield
Amir A Ghaferi
Sarah L Krein
Milisa Manojlovich

Funding

Failure to Rescure-Patient Safety Learning Lab (FTR-PSLL) P30HS024403 · AHRQ · DARTMOUTH-HITCHCOCK · PI BLIKE, GEORGE T · 2015 to 2018
$3.8M
The Effect of Health Information Technology on Healthcare Provider CommunicationR01HS022305 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI MANOJLOVICH, MILISA · 2014 to 2014
$1.6M
Organizational Dynamics and Failure to Rescue After Major SurgeryK08HS023621 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI GHAFERI, AMIR ABBAS · 2015 to 2019
$759k
Videotaping Communication between Physicians and Nurses: A methods studyR03HS024760 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI MANOJLOVICH, MILISA · 2016 to 2016
$100k
AHRQ HHS K08 HS023621AHRQ HHS P30 HS024403AHRQ HHS R01 HS022305AHRQ HHS R03 HS024760HSRD VA RCS 11-222
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCommunication failures pose a significant threat to the quality of care and safety of hospitalized patients. Yet little is known about the nature of communication failures. The aims of this study were to identify and describe types of communication failures in which nurses and physicians were involved and determine how different types of communication failures might affect patient outcomes.

methodsIncident reports filed during fiscal year 2015-2016 at a Midwestern academic health care system (N = 16,165) were electronically filtered and manually reviewed to identify reports that described communication failures involving nurses and physicians (n = 161). Failures were categorized by type using two classification systems: contextual and conceptual. Thematic analysis was used to identify patient outcomes: actual or potential harm, patient dissatisfaction, delay in care, or no harm. Frequency of failure types and outcomes were assessed using descriptive statistics. Associations between failure type and patient outcomes were evaluated using Fisher's exact test.

resultsOf the 211 identified contextual communication failures, errors of omission were the most common (27.0%). More than half of conceptual failures were transfer of information failures (58.4%), while 41.6% demonstrated a lack of shared understanding. Of the 179 identified outcomes, 38.0% were delays in care, 20.1% were physical harm, and 8.9% were dissatisfaction. There was no statistically significant association between failure type category and patient outcomes.

conclusionIt was found that incident reports could identify specific types of communication failures and patient outcomes. This work provides a basis for future intervention development to prevent communication-related adverse events by tailoring interventions to specific types of failures.

Indexed as

CommunicationPatient SafetyRisk ManagementHumansMedical ErrorsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID30935883
PMCPMC6590519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.