WebM&M Cases & Commentaries
WebM&M (Morbidity & Mortality Rounds on the Web) features expert analysis of medical errors reported anonymously by our readers. Spotlight Cases include interactive learning modules available for CME. Commentaries are written by patient safety experts and published monthly. Contribute by Submitting a Case anonymously.
Narrow Results Clear All
- Communication Improvement 5
- Culture of Safety 1
- Education and Training 2
- Human Factors Engineering 5
- Legal and Policy Approaches 1
- Logistical Approaches 1
- Quality Improvement Strategies 5
- Teamwork 1
- Technologic Approaches 2
- Device-related Complications 1
- Diagnostic Errors 7
- Discontinuities, Gaps, and Hand-Off Problems 3
- Interruptions and distractions 1
- Medical Complications 1
- Medication Safety 1
- Nonsurgical Procedural Complications 2
- Psychological and Social Complications 1
- Surgical Complications 1
- Spotlight Case
C. Craig Blackmore, MD, MPH; March 2019
A woman with multiple myeloma required placement of a central venous catheter for apheresis. The outpatient oncologist intended to order a nontunneled catheter via computerized provider order entry but accidentally ordered a tunneled catheter. The interventional radiologist thought the order was unusual but didn't contact the oncologist. A tunneled catheter was placed without complications. When the patient presented for apheresis, providers recognized the wrong catheter had been placed, and the patient underwent an additional procedure.
Clinton J. Coil, MD, MPH, and Mallory D. Witt, MD; September 2017
A woman developed sudden nausea and abdominal distension after undergoing inferior mesenteric artery stenting. The overnight intern forgot to follow up on her abdominal radiograph, which resulted in a critical delay in diagnosing acute mesenteric artery dissection and bowel infarction.
Cindy S. Lee, MD, and Christopher P. Hess, MD, PhD; May 2016
An older man with a history of heavy smoking and chest pain underwent a chest CT in the emergency department that showed no evidence of an aortic dissection on the preliminary read. Although the patient followed up soon thereafter with a new primary care physician, it was not discovered until several months later that a suspicious lung nodule had been spotted on the initial CT.
Robin R. Hemphill, MD, MPH; September 2013
Admitted to the hospital after hours, a patient with a history of type A aortic dissection had his CT scan read as "no acute changes." However, the CT scan had been compared to a text report of a previous scan, rather than the images. The patient died several hours later, and autopsy revealed the dissection had progressed and ruptured.
Annette J. Johnson, MD, MS; October 2011
When a hospitalized man developed an arrhythmia, the night float resident checked a radiology report that stated the patient had a DVT. Intervention was started based on that assumption. However, the radiology report had been transcribed incorrectly.
Manish K. Sethi, MD; February 2010
Over the course of 2 years, a patient who frequently came to the emergency department complaining of abdominal pain underwent 12 CT scans of the abdomen and pelvis. All of them were completely normal.
Richard Cohan, MD; September 2004
Prior to a CT scan, a patient states that he is not allergic to x-ray dye. Soon after injection, he goes into anaphylactic shock.
Marc J. Shapiro, MD; February 2004
Trusting an incorrectly labeled chest x-ray over physical exam findings, a resident places a chest tube for pneumothorax in the wrong side.
John E. Heffner, MD ; May 2003
A chest x-ray incorrectly read as pleural effusion, rather than lung collapse, leads to iatrogenic pneumothorax following thoracentesis.