Scholarlink

Background <p>When something goes wrong in healthcare and results in harm or potential harm to the patient, there is an ethical and moral duty for healthcare professionals to disclose the incident to the patient, their family or their relevant others.</p> Objective <p>This study sought to explore experiences of open disclosure and identify aspects of the process that shaped patient/family experience.</p> Design <p>This research was a retrospective qualitative descriptive study, interviewing those with recent experience of open disclosure. </p> Setting and participants <p>In total, 6 patients/family members, 5 healthcare professionals and 5 patient advocates from Ireland took part in semi-structured interviews. </p> Results <p>The results are organised into five themes: (i) The necessity of acknowledgement and apology, (ii) Importance of clear, compassionate and respectful communication, (iii) Openness and sharing as a two-way process, (iv) Healthcare staff as patients in open disclosure, and (v) The lasting impact of poor experiences of open disclosure. Participants emphasised the importance of apology, clear and compassionate communication and the value of creating space during meetings to listen to the experiences of those who have been impacted. It was reported there is a reluctance to use the term ‘open disclosure’ when discussing issues with patients, families and advocates. This may be due to a fear of litigation, fear that being associated with open disclosure means healthcare staff have made a mistake, and/or the existence of a blame culture within organisations. This research also highlighted the experiences of healthcare staff who themselves experience harm. Their experience when colleagues failed to be transparent was described as akin to a double trauma by participants. </p> Conclusion <p>Participants emphasised key aspects of the process that shaped experience, including quality of communication, openness and the importance of apology and space for sharing experiences. It is evident that compounded harm is happening through poor understanding and implementation of open disclosure, and this is avoidable. Regular feedback from patients and families is important to improve processes and staff training and to ensure the process is meeting the needs of all those involved. </p> Patient or public contribution <p>Patients, patient advocates and experts by experience (those with direct experience of open disclosure) were represented on the steering committee, which guided every phase of this research. They supported the research by providing feedback on study design and recruitment planning, supported sensitive recruitment, helped design the interview guide and reviewed and provided feedback on patient information materials and content forms. </p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Understanding what shapes patient and family experience of the open disclosure process in the Irish healthcare context: a qualitative study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月11日

查看全文
  • Aoife De Brún,
  • Eilish McAuliffe,
  • Lorraine Schwanberg,
  • Éidín Ní Shé

摘要

Background

When something goes wrong in healthcare and results in harm or potential harm to the patient, there is an ethical and moral duty for healthcare professionals to disclose the incident to the patient, their family or their relevant others.

Objective

This study sought to explore experiences of open disclosure and identify aspects of the process that shaped patient/family experience.

Design

This research was a retrospective qualitative descriptive study, interviewing those with recent experience of open disclosure.

Setting and participants

In total, 6 patients/family members, 5 healthcare professionals and 5 patient advocates from Ireland took part in semi-structured interviews.

Results

The results are organised into five themes: (i) The necessity of acknowledgement and apology, (ii) Importance of clear, compassionate and respectful communication, (iii) Openness and sharing as a two-way process, (iv) Healthcare staff as patients in open disclosure, and (v) The lasting impact of poor experiences of open disclosure. Participants emphasised the importance of apology, clear and compassionate communication and the value of creating space during meetings to listen to the experiences of those who have been impacted. It was reported there is a reluctance to use the term ‘open disclosure’ when discussing issues with patients, families and advocates. This may be due to a fear of litigation, fear that being associated with open disclosure means healthcare staff have made a mistake, and/or the existence of a blame culture within organisations. This research also highlighted the experiences of healthcare staff who themselves experience harm. Their experience when colleagues failed to be transparent was described as akin to a double trauma by participants.

Conclusion

Participants emphasised key aspects of the process that shaped experience, including quality of communication, openness and the importance of apology and space for sharing experiences. It is evident that compounded harm is happening through poor understanding and implementation of open disclosure, and this is avoidable. Regular feedback from patients and families is important to improve processes and staff training and to ensure the process is meeting the needs of all those involved.

Patient or public contribution

Patients, patient advocates and experts by experience (those with direct experience of open disclosure) were represented on the steering committee, which guided every phase of this research. They supported the research by providing feedback on study design and recruitment planning, supported sensitive recruitment, helped design the interview guide and reviewed and provided feedback on patient information materials and content forms.