ArticleAustralian veterinary journal2025
Categorising reported errors and incidents from morbidity and mortality meetings (M&Ms) in a small animal multi-specialty veterinary teaching hospital.
Article in Australian veterinary journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- It takes a village - a collective approach to a thriving veterinary profession.Australian veterinary journal · 2026Article
- Cognitive bias in veterinary clinical decision-making: Antemortem misdiagnosis of suspected giant kidney worm (Dioctophyme renale) in Australia.Australian veterinary journal · 2026Article
- Understanding Error Culture in Veterinary Medicine: A Survey Among Veterinary Support Staff Across German-Speaking Countries.Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- "One of the Hardest Things I Have to Do in the Clinic": A Survey of Veterinary Team Members' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Regarding Nail Clipping.Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- Categorising reported errors and incidents from morbidity and mortality meetings (M&Ms) in a small animal multi-specialty veterinary teaching hospital.Australian veterinary journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundErrors in veterinary clinical settings can lead to patient harm. Morbidity and mortality meetings (M&Ms) are forums to discuss errors and incidents that can lead or have led to adverse outcomes, potential harm or unsafe conditions, with the purpose of improving patient safety in future. Despite growing implementation of M&Ms in veterinary medicine, their effectiveness in improving future patient safety may be constrained by the need for absolute confidentiality during meetings.
objectiveTo pilot the use of a simple framework to categorise errors and incidents triggering M&Ms in a multi-specialty Australian veterinary teaching hospital. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective analysis of deidentified M&M summaries over 5 years (2018-2023) from a small animal multi-specialty veterinary teaching hospital. Animal demographic and incident information were extracted, classified by incident type and severity of harm adapted from Wallis and colleagues (2019). Descriptive statistics were produced for error category, severity, incident type and quarter of the year they occurred in. Recommendations were analysed using codebook thematic analysis.
resultsThere were 68 cases in total. The most common overall errors were oversight (n = 26/25.0%), drug (n = 20/19.2%), iatrogenic (n = 17, 16.3%) and staff (n = 17, 16.3%). Most cases resulted in temporary harm (n = 36, 52.9%), though 20.6% (n = 14) resulted in death, euthanasia or permanent harm. The most frequent recommendations were 'improving communications and record keeping', improving staff training' and 'ensuring appropriate equipment is available'.
conclusionCategorisation of errors using this simple framework can facilitate sharing of information which can be used to refine practices and improve animal safety, without compromising confidentiality of M&M meetings.
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.