Perspectives on Safety
Narrow Results Clear All
- Communication Improvement 2
- Error Reporting and Analysis 1
- Logistical Approaches 1
- Quality Improvement Strategies 2
- Research Directions 1
- Technologic Approaches 3
with commentary by Rachel J. Stern, MD, and Urmimala Sarkar, MD, 2018
Patient engagement is widely acknowledged as a cornerstone of patient safety. Research in 2018 demonstrates that patient engagement, when done correctly, can help health care systems identify safety hazards, regain trust after they occur, and codesign sustainable solutions.
Electronic Tools for Patient Safety: Engaging Patients and Providers, September 2015
Dr. Topol is Director of Scripps Translational Science Institute and Editor-in-Chief of Medscape. We spoke with him about his book, The Patient Will See You Now: The Future of Medicine is in Your Hands.
Safety in the Ambulatory Setting, July-August 2014
Dr. Sarkar is an associate professor of medicine at UCSF whose research has focused on ambulatory patient safety, including missed and delayed diagnosis, adverse drug events, and monitoring failures for outpatients with chronic diseases. We spoke with her about patient safety in the ambulatory setting.
with commentary by Richard J. Baron, MD, The Business Case for Improving Safety, May 2009
Most patient interactions with the health care system occur in the outpatient setting. Many potential and actual safety problems occur there as well.(1) Yet patient safety literature and practice do not seem to have reached deeply into ambulatory care. This is likely due to a combination of factors: in most practices, there is no layer of administration providing a second look at routine policies and procedures; there is no accrediting agency, like The Joint Commission, to mandate safe practices (2); and those of us in office practice are so consumed with simply getting through the day that it is difficult to recognize the problems, large and small, that can lead to major safety hazards. The business case for safety, such as it is, relies almost entirely on the malpractice rate-setting process: errors that result in litigation lead to higher premiums and personal and professional misery. However, as Studdert (3) has argued, relying on the malpractice system to identify and "correct" errors is unlikely to be timely or productive.