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
. 2019 Dec 1;26(12):1566-1573.
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocz142.

A patient and family reporting system for perceived ambulatory note mistakes: experience at 3 U.S. healthcare centers

Fabienne C Bourgeois  1 , Alan Fossa  2 , Macda Gerard  2 , Marion E Davis  3 , Yhenneko J Taylor  3 , Crystal D Connor  3 , Tracela Vaden  4 , Andrew McWilliams  3   4 , Melanie D Spencer  3 , Patricia Folcarelli  5 , Sigall K Bell  2
Affiliations

A patient and family reporting system for perceived ambulatory note mistakes: experience at 3 U.S. healthcare centers

Fabienne C Bourgeois et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. .

Abstract

Objective: The study sought to test a patient and family online reporting system for perceived ambulatory visit note inaccuracies.

Materials and methods: We implemented a patient and family electronic reporting system at 3 U.S. healthcare centers: a northeast urban academic adult medical center (AD), a northeast urban academic pediatric medical center (PED), and a southeast nonprofit hospital network (NET). Patients and families reported potential documentation inaccuracies after reading primary care and subspecialty visit notes. Results were characterized using descriptive statistics and coded for clinical relevance.

Results: We received 1440 patient and family reports (780 AD, 402 PED, and 258 NET), and 27% of the reports identified a potential inaccuracy (25% AD, 35% PED, 28% NET). Among these, patients and families indicated that the potential inaccuracy was important or very important in 58% of reports (55% AD, 55% PED, 71% NET). The most common types of potential inaccuracies included description of symptoms (21%), past medical problems (21%), medications (18%), and important information that was missing (15%). Most patient- and family-reported inaccuracies resulted in a change to care or to the medical record (55% AD, 67% PED, data not available at NET).

Discussion: About one-quarter of patients and families using an online reporting system identified potential documentation inaccuracies in visit notes and more than half were considered important by patients and clinicians, underscoring the potential role of patients and families as ambulatory safety partners.

Conclusions: Partnering with patients and families to obtain reports on inaccuracies in visit notes may contribute to safer care. Mechanisms to encourage greater use of patient and family reporting systems are needed.

Keywords: documentation errors; patient and family engagement; patient and provider communication; patient safety.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Woods DM, Thomas EJ, Holl JL, Weiss KB, Brennan TA.. Ambulatory care adverse events and preventable adverse events leading to a hospital admission. Qual Saf Health Care 2007; 162: 127–31. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Singh H, Meyer AND, Thomas EJ.. The frequency of diagnostic errors in outpatient care: estimations from three large observational studies involving US adult populations. BMJ Qual Saf 2014; 239: 727–31. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schiff GD, Reyes Nieva H, Griswold P.. Addressing ambulatory safety and malpractice: The Massachusetts PROMISES Project. Health Serv Res 2016; 51 Suppl 3: 2634–41. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hanskamp-Sebregts M, Zegers M, Vincent C, Van Gurp PJ, Vet H, Wollersheim H.. Measurement of patient safety: a systematic review of the reliability and validity of adverse event detection with record review. BMJ Open 2016; 68: e011078. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Murff HJ, Patel VL, Hripcsak G, Bates DW.. Detecting adverse events for patient safety research: a review of current methodologies. J Biomed Inform 2003; 36 (1–2): 131–43. - PubMed

Publication types