» Articles » PMID: 30555934

Content Analysis of 50 Clinical Negligence Claims Involving Test Results Management Systems in General Practice

Overview
Journal BMJ Open Qual
Specialty Health Services
Date 2018 Dec 18
PMID 30555934
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background And Aims: Laboratory test results management systems are a complex safety issue in primary care settings worldwide. Related failures lead to avoidable patient harm, medicolegal action, patient complaints and additional workload to problem solve identified issues. We aimed to review and learn from 50 clinical negligence cases involving system failures related to the management of test results.

Methods: The Medical Protection Society database was searched and a convenience sample of 50 claims identified from a 3-year period covering 2014-2016. A content analysis of documentation was undertaken to quantify and theme data, aided by a Risk Assessment Matrix and the Yorkshire Contributory Factors Framework. Quantitative data were subjected to simple descriptive statistical analysis.

Results: 14/50 cases (28%) involved a delay in diagnosis or treatment of a patient with cancer. 15 cases were judged to be 'never events' (30%) and 85 distinct system issues were identified. Just under half of cases involved a failure to notify patients of an abnormal test result (n=24, 48%), while 18 cases (36%) involved a test result not being actioned by a doctor. The most frequently occurring contributory factors (n=30, 60%) were related to local working conditions, for example, unclear professional responsibilities with regards to test result review or follow-up or lack of patient care continuity.

Conclusion: This small study highlights why test result management systems fail and contribute to future litigation, providing new insights in this area. Most claims involved avoidable harm to patients and preventable organisational risks. The findings point to the inadequate design of practice systems and the need for proactive strategies to improve the management of test results in order to reduce patient harm.

Citing Articles

Descriptive study of claims in primary care during the year 2022 in a health area of Spain.

Velazquez-Lopez M, Garcia-Perez M, Souto-Pereira M, Vazquez-Lago J Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2024; 80:100546.

PMID: 39626324 PMC: 11650260. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinsp.2024.100546.


'I guess I'll wait to hear'- communication of blood test results in primary care a qualitative study.

Watson J, Salisbury C, Whiting P, Hamilton W, Banks J Br J Gen Pract. 2022; .

PMID: 35817586 PMC: 9282801. DOI: 10.3399/BJGP.2022.0069.


Why Test study protocol: a UK-wide audit using the Primary Care Academic CollaboraTive (PACT) to explore the reasons for primary care testing.

Burrell A, Duncan P, Bennett-Britton I, Hodgson S, Merriel S, Waqar S BJGP Open. 2022; 6(3).

PMID: 35508322 PMC: 9680757. DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2022.0017.


Can patients contribute to enhancing the safety and effectiveness of test-result follow-up? Qualitative outcomes from a health consumer workshop.

Thomas J, Dahm M, Li J, Georgiou A Health Expect. 2020; 24(2):222-233.

PMID: 33283413 PMC: 8077113. DOI: 10.1111/hex.13150.

References
1.
Mold J, Cacy D, Dalbir D . Management of laboratory test results in family practice. An OKPRN study. Oklahoma Physicians Resource/Research Network. J Fam Pract. 2000; 49(8):709-15. View

2.
Elder N, Dovey S . Classification of medical errors and preventable adverse events in primary care: a synthesis of the literature. J Fam Pract. 2002; 51(11):927-32. View

3.
Bird S . A GP's duty to follow up test results. Aust Fam Physician. 2003; 32(1-2):45-6. View

4.
Poon E, Gandhi T, Sequist T, Murff H, Karson A, Bates D . "I wish I had seen this test result earlier!": Dissatisfaction with test result management systems in primary care. Arch Intern Med. 2004; 164(20):2223-8. DOI: 10.1001/archinte.164.20.2223. View

5.
Jacobs S, OBeirne M, Derfiingher L, Vlach L, Rosser W, Drummond N . Errors and adverse events in family medicine: developing and validating a Canadian taxonomy of errors. Can Fam Physician. 2007; 53(2):271-6, 270. PMC: 1949126. View