Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31651540›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient safety2021

Next of Kin Involvement in Regulatory Investigations of Adverse Events That Caused Patient Death: A Process Evaluation (Part I - The Next of Kin's Perspective).

Siri Wiig, Cecilie Haraldseid-Driftland, Rannveig Tvete Zachrisen, Einar Hannisdal, Lene Schibevaag

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient safety, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Patient, carer and family experiences of seeking redress and reconciliation following a life-changing event: Systematic review of qualitative evidence.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Patients' and Caregivers' Suggestions for Improving Assisted Dying Regulation: A Qualitative Study in Australia and Canada.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Humanizing harm: Using a restorative approach to heal and learn from adverse events.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    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

5 authors.

Siri WiigFrom the SHARE-Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger.
Cecilie Haraldseid-DriftlandFrom the SHARE-Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger.
Rannveig Tvete ZachrisenFrom the SHARE-Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger.
Einar HannisdalCounty Governor Oslo and Akershus, Oslo, Norway.
Lene SchibevaagFrom the SHARE-Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of the study was to explore experiences from the next of kin's perspective of a new involvement method in the regulatory investigation process of adverse events causing patient death.

methodsThe study design was a qualitative process evaluation of the new involvement method in two Norwegian counties. Next of kin who had lost a close family member in an adverse event were invited to a 2-hour face-to-face meeting with regulatory inspectors to shed light on the event from the next of kin's perspective. Data collection involved 18 interviews with 29 next of kin who had participated in the meeting and observations (20 hours) of meetings from 2017 to 2018. Data were analyzed using a thematic content analysis.

resultsNext of kin wanted to be involved and had in-depth knowledge about the adverse event and the healthcare system. Their involvement extended beyond sharing information, and some experienced it as having a therapeutic effect and contributing to transparency and trust building. The inspectors' professional, social, and human skills determined the experiences of the involvement and were key for next of kin's positive experiences. The meeting was emotionally challenging, and some next of kin found it difficult to understand the regulators' independent role and suggested improving information given to the next of kin before the meeting.

conclusionsAlthough the meeting was emotionally challenging, the next of kin had a positive experience of being involved in the investigation and believed that their information contributed to improving the investigation process.

Indexed as

FamilyHumansQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID31651540
PMCPMC8612916

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.