Application of root cause analysis on malpractice claim files related to diagnostic failures

Abstract

Background Large numbers of claim files present a potentially valuable source of information to get insight on possibilities for prevention of claims. Therefore, the feasibility of root cause analyses on incidents leading to liability claims at The Netherlands' largest medical liability insurer was assessed. Methods Feasibility was defined by validity, reliability and applicability. Claim files from diagnostic errors in emergency departments of Dutch hospitals were selected. All closed and settled claim files from the year 2001 and 2002 were used. Results Fifty incidents occurring at 31 emergency departments were found in 47 files. 114 root causes were found, on average 2.3 per incident. 78% of the incidents were related to missed fractures, luxations or tendon lesions. Zero technical, 29% organisational, 66.7% human-related and 4.4% patient-related factor errors were found. Inter-rater agreement for classification of root causes was good (k¼0.78). Preventive measures following from Prevention and Recovery Information System for Monitoring and Analysis (PRISMA) classificationeaction matrix were improving completion of available sources of information, improving structures of communication and training staff to prevent failures due to the wrong implementation of tasks or due to errors in reasoning. Discussion Validity of the root cause profile of diagnostic claims is considered moderate because of a lack of information about technical and organisational causes of errors. Therefore, the root cause profile was incomplete for organisational factors in comparison with other studies. However, with regard to the diagnostic reasoning process, the profile was stable. The feasibility of PRISMA for retrospective analyses of closed claims may be improved if system-based reasoning by the liability insurer and hospital staff is enhanced.Learning from incidents by means of root cause analysis is one of the key elements of programmes or institutions aiming to improve patient safety.

Improving the governance of patient safety in emergency care: a systematic review of interventions

“…Of the 16 articles with quantitative research, 8 had no or poor description of their sampling strategy (eg, inclusion and exclusion criteria), 22–24 29 32–34 38 lacked an appropriate sample size 23–26 32 34 37 38 and described sample characteristics insufficiently. 25 28–30 33 35–37 Only two articles with quantitative research reported to appropriately control for confounding variables. 28 31 …”

“…A more detailed overview of the study characteristics is provided in online supplementary appendix 2. Of the 18 included studies, 10 (56%) were performed in the USA, 26 27 30–35 37 39 4 (22%) in Australia, 22–24 28 2 (11%) in the Netherlands, 25 29 1 (6%) in the UK 38 and 1 (6%) in Canada. 36 Thirteen studies (72%) were non-experimental.…”

Simulated medication errors: A means of evaluating healthcare professionals’ knowledge and understanding of medication safety

“…This study used paper-based simulated case studies; this method can reflect reality without potentially identifying individuals implicated in authentic errors reported through hospital safety and quality systems [18,19]. Overall, a similar perspective was revealed among the participants across the three professions on the clinical significance of the MEs, with the majority of participants rating the MEs as "major" or "life threatening", as intended in the design of the cases.…”

“…Use of simulated cases in RCA has demonstrated improvements in terms of confidence and technical skills of staff, and ME reduction [18]. RCA involving simulated cases may promote awareness and understanding of medication safety issues including MEs without the fear of legal ramifications [18,19].…”

Outcomes of medical malpractice claims in assisted reproductive technology over a 10-year period from a single carrier

“…The process of studying claims and settlements provides insight into areas of practice that may require adjustment either in delivery or in counseling across and within specialties. Risk management and root cause analysis are analytic tools to achieve these goals [2,3]. Risk profiles and claim experiences among major specialties such as surgery, anesthesia, and obstetrics are well profiled [4].…”