General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy Doctors Stay Mum About Mistakes Their Colleagues Make
By some estimates, medical errors are one of the leading causes of death in the United States. Physicians often see the mistakes made by their peers, which puts them in a sticky ethical situation: Should they tell the patient about a mistake made by a different doctor? Too often they do not.
A new report in The New England Journal of Medicine, Talking With Patients About Other Clinicians Errors, suggests its a common problem.
The reports lead author, Dr. Thomas Gallagher, an internist and professor at the University of Washington School of Medicine, said he conducted a survey of doctors in which more than half said that, in the prior year, they identified at least one error by a colleague. (The survey, unrelated to the NEMJ report, did not ask what the doctors did about it, Gallagher said.)
Theres wide agreement in the medical community that doctors have an ethical duty to disclose their own errors to patients, Gallagher said. But theres been less discussion about what physicians should do when they discover that someone elses mistake.
For the NEJM report, Gallagher led a team of 15 experts who discussed the problem. They identified many reasons why doctors may want to stay silent about errors by their peers.
One is that doctors depend on each other for business. So a physician who breaks the code of silence may become known as a tattler and lose referrals, a financial penalty. Or maybe they arent sure exactly what happened to the patient and dont want to take the time to try and unravel it. In some cases, issues related to cultural differences, gender, race and seniority come into play.
The report notes that doctors also may be wary of becoming entangled in a medical malpractice case, or of causing a colleague to face legal consequences.
Dr. Brant Mittler, a cardiologist who now works as a medical malpractice attorney in Texas, told me that he frequently saw errors made by other physicians during almost four decades in medicine.
Mittler remembers a scan read by a radiologist that said a patient had an ejection fraction the amount of blood pumped by the heart with each beat of zero. But that would only be possible if the patient was dead, he said. He noted the error to the radiologist, who thanked him.
Many times Mittler stayed quiet, he said. He saw many errors reading electrocardiograms at a 500-bed hospital in San Antonio. He said he didnt know the details of each case, so he couldnt tell if the errors affected the outcome for the patient. But he did not go to the other doctors to point out the errors there would have been hostility if he had, he said.
Many times Mittler stayed quiet, he said. He saw many errors reading electrocardiograms at a 500-bed hospital in San Antonio. He said he didnt know the details of each case, so he couldnt tell if the errors affected the outcome for the patient. But he did not go to the other doctors to point out the errors there would have been hostility if he had, he said.
Theres not a culture where people care about feedback, Mittler said. You figure that if you make them mad theyll come after you in peer review and quality assurance. Theyll figure out a way to get back at you.
http://www.propublica.org/article/why-doctors-stay-mum-about-mistakes-their-colleagues-make
Baitball Blogger
(46,750 posts)Should not be underestimated. Too many people are making the wrong choices. It doesn't matter if they're doctors or lawyers. The professional fields are resorting to cronyism at the expense of the people around them.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)Why do lawyers, accountants, architects, teachers and other professions allow the miscreants within their ranks to define the entire profession?
"There but for the grace of God go I".
If they look the other way when one of their own screws up, others will extend the same courtesy if and when they find themselves in a similar situation.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)reciprocity: this is an institutional thing--it's basically an unspoken I'll-scratch-your-back attitude
(the three big motives for people are institutions, ideas, and interests)
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)for the constituents they purport to represent?
From the article: "Theres not a culture where people care about feedback, Mittler said. You figure that if you make them mad theyll come after you in peer review and quality assurance. Theyll figure out a way to get back at you.
Money, power, sex, ego. There's some duplication there.
The only thing that surprises me is how little it takes to buy someone.
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)it all comes down to greed. Wonder if some type of single payer, universal health care system could at least cut down on the cronyism we have in our system.