eprintid: 33638 rev_number: 26 userid: 7134 dir: disk0/00/03/36/38 datestamp: 2018-07-17 16:56:16 lastmod: 2018-07-17 16:56:16 status_changed: 2018-07-17 16:56:16 type: thesis succeeds: 33453 metadata_visibility: show contact_email: elizabethsir@outlook.com item_issues_id: duplicate_title_33453 item_issues_type: duplicate_title item_issues_description: Duplicate title to Sierminski, Elizabeth (2017) A comparative review of patient and provider perspectives on apology in medical error disclosure. Master Essay, University of Pittsburgh. item_issues_timestamp: 2017-12-18 07:02:10 item_issues_status: autoresolved item_issues_count: 0 eprint_status: archive creators_name: Sierminski, Elizabeth creators_email: ers111@pitt.edu creators_id: ers111 contributors_type: committee_chair contributors_type: committee_member contributors_name: Felter, Elizabeth M. contributors_name: Degenholtz, Howard B. contributors_email: emfelter@pitt.edu contributors_email: degen@pitt.edu title: A comparative review of patient and provider perspectives on apology in medical error disclosure ispublished: pub divisions: sch_gsph_behavioralcommhealthsci full_text_status: public keywords: medical error, medical error disclosure, disclosure, communication and resolution, apology abstract: Background: Adverse health events are estimated to be the third leading cause of injury in the US. Both patients and physicians experience pronounced psychological distress in the wake of adverse events. Traditionally, physicians and institutions have revealed little, if any, information to patients, as a protective measure against malpractice claims. This practice often signals the end of the physician-patient relationship and leaves both parties feeling guilty, afraid, and alone. Proactive adverse event disclosure is an emerging best practice. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) regards apology a necessary component of disclosure and 36 states have enacted laws excluding words of apology from admissible evidence of malpractice liability, but only about 11% of injured patients receive one. Evidence from psychology, communication, and other fields, suggests apology is a constructive coping mechanism. This essay will provide a patient and provider-centric introduction to adverse event research and policy. It will then present a rapid review of descriptive and empirical studies on patient and provider perspectives on apology, with the goal of shedding light on disconnects, to inform future research, policy, and interventions. This essay has public health significance because it is the first literature review to focus exclusively on descriptive and empirical studies on US patient and physician perspectives on apology in adverse event disclosure. Methods: A PubMed literature search was conducted using the search terms medical error, apology, and disclosure. Selections were limited to peer-reviewed, empirical studies relevant to patient and provider perspectives on apology for adverse events occurring in adult populations in US inpatient or equivalent hospitals. Articles on obstetric errors were excluded because they produce an incomparable psychological response. Results: The search returned 16 studies. Patient studies primarily tested the association between apology and psychological, physician-patient, and intent to sue outcomes. Physician articles primarily focused on intent and ability to deliver an apology. Conclusion: Current research is sparse and limited in generalizability but some themes emerged. Apology is strongly associated with improved intrapersonal and interpersonal patient outcomes. Apology is not strongly associated with intent to sue. Semantics are a primary concern for physicians because they fear admitting fault will drive the patient to file a malpractice claim. However, research suggests that expressions of empathy and nonverbal cues are more meaningful to patient outcomes, including intent to sue. More research is needed in all areas but qualitative analyses of physician experiences with apology are especially lacking. date: 2017-12 date_type: submitted pages: 64 institution: University of Pittsburgh refereed: TRUE etd_defense_date: 2017-12-17 etd_submission_date: 2017-11-27 etd_access_restriction: immediate etd_patent_pending: FALSE thesis_type: masteressay degree: MPH citation: Sierminski, Elizabeth (2017) A comparative review of patient and provider perspectives on apology in medical error disclosure. Master Essay, University of Pittsburgh. document_url: http://d-scholarship-dev.library.pitt.edu/33638/1/Sierminski_Elizabeth_MPHessay_12_2017.docx