[Quality of information on adverse events provided by the surgical patient]

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether patients are a good information source on the occurrence of adverse events (AE).

Design: Analytical retrospective study using in-depth interviews in a double-blind protocol, and in parallel, to ensure whether the patient had actually suffered an AE. The Harvard method was also applied to review the medical records using a screening guide. Agreement between the physician and patient point of view of the surgery outcome was also estimated.

Participants: A total of 28 randomly selected surgical patients discharged from a general hospital were interviewed. Ten patients (28% of the total suffering an AE yearly) who had experienced an AE, confirmed after a medical record review, and 18 patients who did not suffer an AE.

Results: Intraclass correlation coefficient for the agreement between the medical criterion and the patient point of view was 0.35 (95% CI; 0.2-0.6), and the number of correct classifications was 20/28 (71%, 95% CI; 51-86). Reporting an error reduces the likelihood of the hospital being considered as safe (Fisher's exact p=0.012). Errors were attributed to workload and to the intrinsic randomness of human activity.

Conclusions: Patients can contribute in identifying an AE affecting them in a reasonable manner, providing us with additional information for enhancing patient safety and the quality of medical records.