Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 May-Jun;7(3):223-31.
doi: 10.1370/afm.941.

Patient error: a preliminary taxonomy

Affiliations

Patient error: a preliminary taxonomy

Stephen Buetow et al. Ann Fam Med. 2009 May-Jun.

Erratum in

  • Ann Fam Med. 2009 Jul-Aug;7(4):373

Abstract

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Brennan TA. The Institute of Medicine report on medical errors—could it do harm? N Engl J Med. 2000;342(15):1123–1125. - PubMed
    1. Thomas EJ, Petersen LA. Measuring errors and adverse events in health care. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18(1):61–67. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ely JW, Levinson W, Elder NC, Mainous AG, Vinson DC. Perceived causes of family physician errors. J Fam Pract. 1995;40(4):337–344. - PubMed
    1. Rubin G, George A, Chinn DJ, Richardson C. Errors in general practice: development of an error classification and pilot study of a method for detecting errors. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12(6): 443–447. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dovey SM, Meyers DS, Phillips RL Jr, et al. A preliminary taxonomy of medical errors in family practice. Qual Saf Health Care. 2002;11(3):233–238. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types