• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

医学专业人员向患者披露医疗差错:一项定性系统评价的方案。

Disclosure of medical errors to patients by medical professionals: a protocol for a qualitative systematic review.

机构信息

People's Hospital of Aba Tibetan and Qiang Autonomous Prefecture, Maerkang, Sichuan, China.

The Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang, Guizhou, China

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2024 Oct 11;14(10):e085795. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085795.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085795
PMID:39395827
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11474834/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Although the disclosure of medical errors is an integral component of medical ethics, it remains inconsistent in practice worldwide. Despite various explanations of why healthcare professionals reveal their mistakes to patients, comprehensive comparisons and evaluations of this topic remain lacking. The objective of this review is to evaluate the experience of medical error disclosure among medical professionals who have been involved in such errors.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This work will focus on studies involving medical professionals from various countries who work in hospital settings and have obtained an understanding of and firsthand experience with medical error disclosure. This review will include qualitative studies. Studies published in databases such as PubMed, Embase, EBSCO, OVID, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and Cochrane Library from 1 January 2000 to 30 April 2024 will be searched as part of this research. Additionally, OpenGrey will be searched manually to obtain supplementary information. The search will be conducted starting in May 2024 and will include both Chinese-language and English-language literature. The systematic review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute's (JBI) methodology for systematic reviews of qualitative evidence and use the JBI System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information online program. Study authenticity will be investigated via the Qualitative Research Authenticity Evaluation Tool provided by the JBI Evidence-Based Health Care Centre, and data extraction will be performed via the Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument data extraction tool. The results will be integrated via a pooled integration methodology and evaluated in terms of reliability via the ConQual qualitative systematic evaluation evidence grading tool.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required for the study because the review will be based on pre-existing data available in the literature. The results of this systematic review will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42024494360.

摘要

简介

尽管披露医疗差错是医学伦理的一个组成部分,但在全球范围内,这一做法在实践中仍不一致。尽管有各种解释说明医疗保健专业人员为何向患者披露其错误,但仍缺乏对此主题的全面比较和评估。本综述的目的是评估曾犯过此类错误的医疗专业人员披露医疗差错的经验。

方法和分析

这项工作将侧重于来自不同国家、在医院工作的医疗专业人员的研究,这些人员对披露医疗差错有一定的了解并具有第一手经验。本综述将包括定性研究。从 2000 年 1 月 1 日至 2024 年 4 月 30 日,将在 PubMed、Embase、EBSCO、OVID、Web of Science、ScienceDirect、中国国家知识基础设施、万方数据和 Cochrane Library 等数据库中搜索研究,同时将手动搜索 OpenGrey 以获取补充信息。搜索将于 2024 年 5 月开始,包括中文和英文文献。系统综述将遵循 JBI 对定性证据系统评价的方法,并使用 JBI 在线统一管理、评估和审查信息系统进行评价。研究真实性将通过 JBI 循证卫生保健中心提供的定性研究真实性评估工具进行调查,数据提取将通过定性评估和审查仪器数据提取工具进行。结果将通过汇总整合方法进行整合,并通过 ConQual 定性系统评价证据分级工具评估可靠性。

伦理和传播

由于本综述将基于文献中已有数据,因此不需要进行伦理审查。本系统综述的结果将提交给同行评议期刊,并在相关会议上展示。

PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42024494360。

相似文献

1
Disclosure of medical errors to patients by medical professionals: a protocol for a qualitative systematic review.医学专业人员向患者披露医疗差错:一项定性系统评价的方案。
BMJ Open. 2024 Oct 11;14(10):e085795. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085795.
2
Experiences of pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review of qualitative evidence protocol.孕妇妊娠糖尿病体验的系统评价:定性证据方案。
BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 18;10(2):e034126. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034126.
3
Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.医疗专业人员在急症医院环境中团队合作教育的经验:对定性文献的系统综述
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):96-137. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-1843.
4
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
5
Barriers and facilitators to dementia care in long-term care facilities: protocol for a qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis.长期护理机构中痴呆症护理的障碍和促进因素:定性系统评价和荟萃综合的方案。
BMJ Open. 2023 Nov 1;13(11):e076058. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-076058.
6
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.超越黑木树:影响澳大利亚地区、农村和偏远地区的健康研究问题的快速综述。
Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881.
7
Living experiences of patients with advanced cancer with low socioeconomic status: protocol for a systematic review of qualitative evidence.低社会经济地位的晚期癌症患者的生活体验:系统评价定性证据的方案。
BMJ Open. 2022 Feb 1;12(2):e054606. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054606.
8
Healthcare provider's experiences of supporting breastfeeding: protocol for a systematic review of qualitative evidence.卫生保健提供者支持母乳喂养的体验:系统评价定性证据的方案。
BMJ Open. 2022 Apr 8;12(4):e056001. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056001.
9
Experiences and perspectives of healthcare professionals, patients and caregivers toward the serious illness conversation guide: protocol for a qualitative meta-synthesis.医疗保健专业人员、患者和护理人员对严重疾病对话指南的经验和观点:定性荟萃分析方案。
BMJ Open. 2023 Nov 27;13(11):e073171. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073171.
10
Baccalaureate nursing students' experiences with high-fidelity simulation: protocol for a qualitative systematic review.护理学士学生在高保真模拟中的体验:一项定性系统评价的方案。
BMJ Open. 2020 Dec 8;10(12):e040171. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040171.

本文引用的文献

1
The Role of Pediatric Nurses During Preventable Adverse Event Disclosure: A Scoping Review.儿科护士在可预防不良事件披露中的作用:一项范围综述
J Patient Saf. 2024 Sep 1;20(6):381-387. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000001239. Epub 2024 May 16.
2
Iranian nurses' attitudes towards the disclosure of patient safety incidents: a qualitative study.伊朗护士对披露患者安全事件的态度:一项定性研究。
BMJ Open. 2024 Mar 29;14(3):e076498. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-076498.
3
Promoting a culture of sharing the error: A qualitative study in resident physicians' process of coping and learning through self-disclosure after medical error.
倡导分享错误的文化:一项关于住院医师在医疗差错后通过自我披露进行应对和学习过程的定性研究。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Oct 21;9:960418. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.960418. eCollection 2022.
4
Classifying and Disclosing Medical Errors.医疗差错的分类与披露
Med Clin North Am. 2022 Jul;106(4):675-687. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2022.02.007. Epub 2022 May 28.
5
Duties of Candour in Healthcare: The Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing but the Truth?医疗保健中的坦诚义务:真话、全部真话、还是只有真话?
Med Law Rev. 2022 May 30;30(2):324-347. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwac004.
6
Patients' and Families' Experiences Regarding Disclosure of Patient Safety Incidents.患者和家属对患者安全事件披露的体验。
Qual Health Res. 2021 Nov;31(13):2502-2511. doi: 10.1177/10497323211037634. Epub 2021 Oct 12.
7
Patient Safety in the Eyes of Aspiring Healthcare Professionals: A Systematic Review of Their Attitudes.未来医疗保健专业人员眼中的患者安全:对其态度的系统评价。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jul 15;18(14):7524. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18147524.
8
Policies and practice in the disclosure of medical error: Insights from leading countries to address the issue in Italy.披露医疗差错的政策和实践:意大利借鉴领先国家解决该问题的经验。
Med Sci Law. 2021 Jan;61(1_suppl):88-91. doi: 10.1177/0025802420979441.
9
Korean physicians' perceptions regarding disclosure of patient safety incidents: A cross-sectional study.韩国医生对患者安全事件披露的看法:一项横断面研究。
PLoS One. 2020 Oct 8;15(10):e0240380. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240380. eCollection 2020.
10
Medical error professionals' perspectives on Inter-system Medical Error Discovery (IMED): Consensus, divergence, and uncertainty.医疗差错专业人士对跨系统医疗差错发现(IMED)的看法:共识、分歧与不确定性。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Jul 31;99(31):e21425. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000021425.