Table 2Attributes of errors related to harm (N = 608)

Error typeError attributes [N (%)]Future risk of harm to patient or others [Frequency (%)] OR (95% CI) (N = 55)Known clinical harm to patient [Frequency (%)] OR (95% CI) (N = 62)
Prescription errorAny prescription drug or device error26 (47.3)37 (59.7)
165 (27.1)3.18 (1.78 – 5.68)b5.25 (3.00 – 9.19)b
Correct drug selected, but other prescribing error17 (30.9)27 (43.5)
99 (16.3)3.41 (1.78 – 5.61)b5.88 (3.27–10.57)b
Coordination of care errorError participants outside of the officeNS25 (40.3)
137(22.5)2.88 (1.64 – 5.06)b
Problems with communication from another officeNS15 (24.2)
73 (12.0)2.91 (1.50 – 5.67)b
Errors relating to disclosure to, explanation to, or followup with a patient11 (20)13 (21)
55 (9.9)3.80 (1.75 – 8.25)b4.03 (1.94 – 8.40)b
Errors in clinical activitiesMistimed proceduresNS33 (53.2)
244 (40.1)2.18 (1.27 – 3.73)b
Examination errorsNS8 (12.9)
38 (6.3)3.60 (1.47 – 8.82)a
Diagnostic errors10 (18.2)NS
74 (12.2)2.35 (1.09–5.06)b
Delays in therapy17 (30.9)20 (32.3)
81 (13.3)4.88 (2.50 – 9.55)b5.20 (2.75 – 9.83)b
Errors related to cognitionJudgment and knowledgeNS26 (41.9)
129 (21.2)3.40 (1.93 –5.98)b
Systems issueNS11 (17.7)
72 (11.8)2.08 (1.00 – 4.33)a
Error participantClinician of record31 (56.4)39 (62.9)
267(43.9)1.84 (1.04 – 3.25)a2.42 (1.39 – 4.20)a
a

P <0.05.

b

P <0.01 in chi-square test.

From: Relationship Between Patient Harm and Reported Medical Errors in Primary Care: A Report from the ASIPS Collaborative

Cover of Advances in Patient Safety: New Directions and Alternative Approaches (Vol. 1: Assessment)
Advances in Patient Safety: New Directions and Alternative Approaches (Vol. 1: Assessment).
Henriksen K, Battles JB, Keyes MA, et al., editors.

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.