ArticleBMJ open2022
Adverse event reviews in healthcare: what matters to patients and their family? A qualitative study exploring the perspective of patients and family.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Responding to Surgical Errors: From Psychological Impact to Disclosure-A Systematic Review.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Pooled it
- 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 · 2023Pooled it
- Parents' Experiences of Patient Safety Incidents During Their Child's Hospitalization: A Qualitative Study.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Article
- Prioritising time for communication in healthcare-a normative analysis.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026Article
- What Do Consumers Need Before, During and After a Patient Safety Incident Review? A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Organizational Silence as a Mediator Between Ethical Nursing Competence and Perceptions of Open Disclosure in Patient Safety Incidents.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- Factors influencing the nature of client complaint behaviour in the aftermath of adverse events.The Veterinary record · 2025Article
- The Learn Together programme (part A): co-designing an approach to support patient and family involvement and engagement in patient safety incident investigations.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- Restorative initiatives: emerging insights from design, implementation and collaboration in five countries.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- The Learn Together programme (part B): evaluating co-designed guidance to support patient and family involvement in patient safety incident investigations.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- Decades of failure to prevent harm to patients-where are we going wrong? A mixed methods study of the perspectives of health services staff across Australia and internationally.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- Beyond the numbers: Classifying contributory factors and potentially avoidable adverse events in the gynaecology service of National Women's Health at Auckland District Health Board.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2024Article
- Patient perspectives on adverse event investigations in health care.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Humanizing processes after harm part 1: patient safety incident investigations, litigation and the experiences of those affected.Frontiers in health services · 2024Article
- Humanising processes after harm part 2: compounded harm experienced by patients and their families after safety incidents.Frontiers in health services · 2024Article
- Planned improvement actions based on patient safety incident reports in Estonian hospitals: a document analysis.BMJ open quality · 2023Article
- Malpractice Claims and Incident Reporting: Two Faces of the Same Coin?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesExplore what 'good' patient and family involvement in healthcare adverse event reviews may involve.
designData was collected using semi-structured telephone interviews. Interview transcripts were analysed using an inductive thematic approach.
settingNHS Scotland.
participants19 interviews were conducted with patients who had experienced an adverse event during the provision of their healthcare or their family member.
resultsFour key themes were derived from these interviews: trauma, communication, learning and litigation.
conclusionsThere are many advantages of actively involving patients and their families in adverse event reviews. An open, collaborative, person-centred approach which listens to, and involves, patients and their families is perceived to lead to improved outcomes. For the patient and their family, it can help with reconciliation following a traumatic event and help restore their faith in the healthcare system. For the health service, listening and involving people will likely enhance learning with subsequent improvements in healthcare provision with reduction in risk of similar events occurring for other patients. This study suggests eight recommendations for involving patients and families in adverse event reviews using the APICCTHS model (table 3) which includes an apology, person-centred inclusive communication, closing the loop, timeliness, putting patients and families at the heart of the review with appropriate support for staff involved. Communicating in a compassionate manner could also decrease litigation claims following an adverse event.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.