Hickson Gerald B, Boothman Richard C, Krumm Alice M, Wyatt Ronald
Center for Patient and Professional Advocacy, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States.
Boothman Consulting Group, LLC, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.
Front Health Serv. 2025 Mar 4;4:1523363. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2024.1523363. eCollection 2024.
Communication and Resolution Programs' (CRP) favorable impact on professional liability claims continues to draw attention, but because they are deliberately aligned to advance the health system's mission rather than amelioration of litigation exposure, CRPs stand a better chance of delivering durable healthcare improvements than traditional responses to patient harm. CRP adherents employ focused investigations overseen by their own patient safety leader in order to engage patients with a principled response following unintended clinical outcomes. Focused on safety and unencumbered by litigation delays, CRP investigations are more apt than traditional responses to lay bare patient safety risks including professionalism challenges. Leaders, however, must be prepared to embrace and address hard-to-hear truths about dysfunctional systems or disruptive humans that threaten outcomes of care or clinical staff wellbeing.
沟通与解决计划（CRP）对医疗职业责任索赔的积极影响持续受到关注，但由于这些计划是特意为推进医疗系统的使命而设计，而非减轻诉讼风险，因此与传统的患者伤害应对措施相比，CRP更有可能带来持久的医疗改善。CRP的支持者通过由自身患者安全负责人监督的重点调查，以便在出现意外临床结果后以有原则的方式与患者沟通。专注于安全且不受诉讼延误的影响，CRP调查比传统应对措施更能揭示患者安全风险，包括职业素养方面的挑战。然而，领导者必须准备好接受并应对关于功能失调的系统或扰乱性人员的难以听闻的真相，这些可能会威胁到医疗结果或临床工作人员的福祉。
