| Type . | Purpose . | Utility . |
|---|---|---|
| Interviews | • Collect information about the individual patient, adverse event, causal chain, involved healthcare personnel and stakeholders, and clarify questions | • Improved understanding of the adverse event and causal chain |
| • Can be tailor made for type of fatal event (wrong site surgery, medication administration, events involving multiple stakeholders and system actors, contextual settings) | ||
| • Contributes to doing justice to the family by allowing individuals to be heard and respected | ||
| • Improved learning information in individual cases | ||
| • Can be time-consuming and requires training of investigators | ||
| Focus groups | • Collect information about themes, experiences and patterns across different types of adverse event types, similar types of events, similar or different contextual settings or how to develop investigatory practice with family involvement | • Improved and tailor made procedures co-designed with families |
| • Aggregated information with different types of themes and contexts that could inform areas of improvement activities and risk areas and inform accident prevention strategies | ||
| • Needs training for investigators | ||
| Meetings | • Collect information or feedback information to individual or multiple family members in single cases of investigations. This could also work to discuss recommendations and dissemination of information | • Strengthens the interaction and communication between investigation body and the family |
| • Strengthens the recommendations related to the investigation report | ||
| • Allows individuals or families to be heard and respected | ||
| • Can be time-consuming and emotionally challenging | ||
| • Needs training for investigators | ||
| Questionnaires | • Collect information from individual cases where family members do not wish to participate in meetings and interviews or have disabilities or long travel distances | • Potential to contact difficult to reach groups and larger samples of family members |
| • Collect information from groups of family members on, e.g. topics or themes of investigations, suggestions for dissemination activities or particular types of events | • Elicits information about attitudes and perspectives | |
| • Information is relatively objective | ||
| • Low cost | ||
| • Not time-consuming for investigators or family members as interviews or meetings and no travel needed | ||
| Conferences | • To disseminate findings to groups of families, healthcare professionals and policymakers | • Reaches wider audiences |
| • To disseminate recommendations | • Spreads knowledge and facilitates information exchange | |
| • Can help build and restore trust in the system | ||
| • Can be expensive and involves travelling for the audience and speakers | ||
| Consensus panel | • To develop recommendations | • Similar to many of the above utility aspects |
| • Reaches a wider group of family members with experience with fatal adverse events to guide method development |
| Type . | Purpose . | Utility . |
|---|---|---|
| Interviews | • Collect information about the individual patient, adverse event, causal chain, involved healthcare personnel and stakeholders, and clarify questions | • Improved understanding of the adverse event and causal chain |
| • Can be tailor made for type of fatal event (wrong site surgery, medication administration, events involving multiple stakeholders and system actors, contextual settings) | ||
| • Contributes to doing justice to the family by allowing individuals to be heard and respected | ||
| • Improved learning information in individual cases | ||
| • Can be time-consuming and requires training of investigators | ||
| Focus groups | • Collect information about themes, experiences and patterns across different types of adverse event types, similar types of events, similar or different contextual settings or how to develop investigatory practice with family involvement | • Improved and tailor made procedures co-designed with families |
| • Aggregated information with different types of themes and contexts that could inform areas of improvement activities and risk areas and inform accident prevention strategies | ||
| • Needs training for investigators | ||
| Meetings | • Collect information or feedback information to individual or multiple family members in single cases of investigations. This could also work to discuss recommendations and dissemination of information | • Strengthens the interaction and communication between investigation body and the family |
| • Strengthens the recommendations related to the investigation report | ||
| • Allows individuals or families to be heard and respected | ||
| • Can be time-consuming and emotionally challenging | ||
| • Needs training for investigators | ||
| Questionnaires | • Collect information from individual cases where family members do not wish to participate in meetings and interviews or have disabilities or long travel distances | • Potential to contact difficult to reach groups and larger samples of family members |
| • Collect information from groups of family members on, e.g. topics or themes of investigations, suggestions for dissemination activities or particular types of events | • Elicits information about attitudes and perspectives | |
| • Information is relatively objective | ||
| • Low cost | ||
| • Not time-consuming for investigators or family members as interviews or meetings and no travel needed | ||
| Conferences | • To disseminate findings to groups of families, healthcare professionals and policymakers | • Reaches wider audiences |
| • To disseminate recommendations | • Spreads knowledge and facilitates information exchange | |
| • Can help build and restore trust in the system | ||
| • Can be expensive and involves travelling for the audience and speakers | ||
| Consensus panel | • To develop recommendations | • Similar to many of the above utility aspects |
| • Reaches a wider group of family members with experience with fatal adverse events to guide method development |
| Type . | Purpose . | Utility . |
|---|---|---|
| Interviews | • Collect information about the individual patient, adverse event, causal chain, involved healthcare personnel and stakeholders, and clarify questions | • Improved understanding of the adverse event and causal chain |
| • Can be tailor made for type of fatal event (wrong site surgery, medication administration, events involving multiple stakeholders and system actors, contextual settings) | ||
| • Contributes to doing justice to the family by allowing individuals to be heard and respected | ||
| • Improved learning information in individual cases | ||
| • Can be time-consuming and requires training of investigators | ||
| Focus groups | • Collect information about themes, experiences and patterns across different types of adverse event types, similar types of events, similar or different contextual settings or how to develop investigatory practice with family involvement | • Improved and tailor made procedures co-designed with families |
| • Aggregated information with different types of themes and contexts that could inform areas of improvement activities and risk areas and inform accident prevention strategies | ||
| • Needs training for investigators | ||
| Meetings | • Collect information or feedback information to individual or multiple family members in single cases of investigations. This could also work to discuss recommendations and dissemination of information | • Strengthens the interaction and communication between investigation body and the family |
| • Strengthens the recommendations related to the investigation report | ||
| • Allows individuals or families to be heard and respected | ||
| • Can be time-consuming and emotionally challenging | ||
| • Needs training for investigators | ||
| Questionnaires | • Collect information from individual cases where family members do not wish to participate in meetings and interviews or have disabilities or long travel distances | • Potential to contact difficult to reach groups and larger samples of family members |
| • Collect information from groups of family members on, e.g. topics or themes of investigations, suggestions for dissemination activities or particular types of events | • Elicits information about attitudes and perspectives | |
| • Information is relatively objective | ||
| • Low cost | ||
| • Not time-consuming for investigators or family members as interviews or meetings and no travel needed | ||
| Conferences | • To disseminate findings to groups of families, healthcare professionals and policymakers | • Reaches wider audiences |
| • To disseminate recommendations | • Spreads knowledge and facilitates information exchange | |
| • Can help build and restore trust in the system | ||
| • Can be expensive and involves travelling for the audience and speakers | ||
| Consensus panel | • To develop recommendations | • Similar to many of the above utility aspects |
| • Reaches a wider group of family members with experience with fatal adverse events to guide method development |
| Type . | Purpose . | Utility . |
|---|---|---|
| Interviews | • Collect information about the individual patient, adverse event, causal chain, involved healthcare personnel and stakeholders, and clarify questions | • Improved understanding of the adverse event and causal chain |
| • Can be tailor made for type of fatal event (wrong site surgery, medication administration, events involving multiple stakeholders and system actors, contextual settings) | ||
| • Contributes to doing justice to the family by allowing individuals to be heard and respected | ||
| • Improved learning information in individual cases | ||
| • Can be time-consuming and requires training of investigators | ||
| Focus groups | • Collect information about themes, experiences and patterns across different types of adverse event types, similar types of events, similar or different contextual settings or how to develop investigatory practice with family involvement | • Improved and tailor made procedures co-designed with families |
| • Aggregated information with different types of themes and contexts that could inform areas of improvement activities and risk areas and inform accident prevention strategies | ||
| • Needs training for investigators | ||
| Meetings | • Collect information or feedback information to individual or multiple family members in single cases of investigations. This could also work to discuss recommendations and dissemination of information | • Strengthens the interaction and communication between investigation body and the family |
| • Strengthens the recommendations related to the investigation report | ||
| • Allows individuals or families to be heard and respected | ||
| • Can be time-consuming and emotionally challenging | ||
| • Needs training for investigators | ||
| Questionnaires | • Collect information from individual cases where family members do not wish to participate in meetings and interviews or have disabilities or long travel distances | • Potential to contact difficult to reach groups and larger samples of family members |
| • Collect information from groups of family members on, e.g. topics or themes of investigations, suggestions for dissemination activities or particular types of events | • Elicits information about attitudes and perspectives | |
| • Information is relatively objective | ||
| • Low cost | ||
| • Not time-consuming for investigators or family members as interviews or meetings and no travel needed | ||
| Conferences | • To disseminate findings to groups of families, healthcare professionals and policymakers | • Reaches wider audiences |
| • To disseminate recommendations | • Spreads knowledge and facilitates information exchange | |
| • Can help build and restore trust in the system | ||
| • Can be expensive and involves travelling for the audience and speakers | ||
| Consensus panel | • To develop recommendations | • Similar to many of the above utility aspects |
| • Reaches a wider group of family members with experience with fatal adverse events to guide method development |
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
