General practitioners’ attitudes toward reporting and learning from adverse events: Results from a survey

Figures & data

Table I.  GPs’ attitudes towards systematic quality improvement through analysis of adverse events.

Survey question	All n = 727	Males < 50 years n = 118	Males ≥50 years n = 345	Females < 50 years n = 139	Females ≥ 50 years n = 121	p-values for sex and age
I am positive (regarding systematic reporting to a database ed.) provided that the physician cannot be exposed or punished for reporting an adverse event	575 79% [76%; 82%]	95 81% [72%; 87%]	264 77% [72%; 81%]	121 88% [81%; 93%]	93 78% [69%; 85%]	0.048
A reporting system for adverse events would enable more openness among colleagues about medical errors	526 73% [69%; 76%]	82 69% [60%; 78%]	241 70% [65%; 75%]	106 77% [69%; 84%]	95 79% [71%; 86%]	0.109
The GP's job satisfaction would improve if a forum for structured analysis and discussion of critical events existed	520 72% [68%; 75%]	84 71% [62%; 79%]	245 71% [66%; 76%]	99 72% [63%; 79%]	90 75% [66%; 82%]	0.865
A reporting system would make it more difficult to be a GP	137 19% [16%; 22%]	31 26% [19%; 35%]	68 20% [16%; 24%]	21 15% [10%; 22%]	16 14% [8%; 21%]	0.056

Figures show respondents’ answers (strongly or somewhat agree) in numbers, percentage, and with confidence intervals. Percentages calculated after exclusion of missing answers.

Table II.  GPs’ experiences with and learning from adverse events.

Survey question	All n 727	Males < 50 years n = 118	Males ≥ 50 years n = 345	Females < 50 years n = 139	Females ≥ 50 years n = 121	p-values for sex and age
I have experienced adverse events in my clinic that have made me change my procedures	290 40% [37%; 44%]	42 36% [27%; 45%]	133 39% [33%; 44%]	62 46% [37%; 54%]	51 43% [34%; 53%]	0.318
I have changed my conduct and routines based on other GPs’ experience with adverse events	306 43% [39%; 47%]	51 44% [34%; 53%]	137 40% [35%; 45%]	63 47% [38%; 56%]	52 45% [36%; 55%]	0.507
Other GPs could learn from my experience of adverse events	429 61% [58%; 65%]	72 62% [53%; 71%]	189 56% [51%; 61%]	99 76% [68%; 83%]	67 60% [50%; 69%]	0.001

Figures show respondents’ answers (strongly or somewhat agree) in numbers, percentage, and with confidence intervals. Percentage calculated after exclusion of missing answers.

Table III.  Basic attitude questions related to gender, age, and practice type among the 727 respondents.

				Gender					Age
		All		Male		Female			<50 years		≥50 years
		n = 727		n = 463		n = 261			n = 258		n = 466
Subject of interest	Question	n	Yes (%)	n	Yes (%)	n	Yes (%)	p-value	n	Yes (%)	n	Yes (%)	p-value
Where do the GPs wish to discuss and analyse critical events	In my own practice with other GPs ^1,2	538	99	292	99.7	204	99.0	0.571ˆ	199	99.5	297	99.3	1.000 ˆ
	In my own practice with the staff^2	696	94	444	93.9	250	94.8	0.633	250	97.6	444	92.3	0.004
	In my usual CME group^2	689	89	437	87.4	250	90.8	0.178	247	91.5	440	87.1	0.078
	In a special CME group with colleagues of my own choice working with critical events^2	672	46	432	44.7	238	47.5	0.486	237	48.1	433	44.1	0.321
Consideration is being given to the establishment of a system for reporting critical events to a database with a view to enhancing exchange from experience	I am positive provided that the physician cannot be “exposed” or exposed to penal sanction^3	724	79	463	77.5	259	82.6	0.105	257	84.4	465	76.8	0.015
General attitude question	Patient safety will be improved if a reporting system is established^3	722	74.5	461	72.9	259	77.2	0.201	258	75.6	462	74.0	0.646

¹Only for non-solo respondents. ²Only positive answers stating “certainly” and “willing” are included under Yes (%). ³Only positive answers stating “strongly agree” and “somewhat agree” are included under Yes (%). P-value: chi-squared test (except ˆ) Fisher's exact test.