Cultivating an environment where medical students confidently address medical errors is crucial for advancing patient safety within healthcare systems. In Asian medical training contexts, hierarchical structures can significantly deter open communication. These dynamics often lead to unintended consequences where vital information remains unshared, increasing potential risks to patients. A study based in Northern Taiwan sheds light on how education and mentorship can evolve to better support students in overcoming barriers to speaking up about medical errors and facilitating a safer clinical environment. This exploration identifies key motivators and obstacles, aiming to embed patient safety at the forefront of future healthcare training.
Study Design and Methodology
Researchers employed a qualitative, descriptive phenomenological approach to examine the factors influencing medical students’ behavior around speaking up. Between October 2023 and April 2024, sixth-year medical students from a Northern Taiwan teaching hospital participated in semi-structured interviews, offering insights into their experiences. The interviews concluded once thematic saturation was reached with the 10th interview. Thematic analysis was used to dissect the richness of interview data, unveiling the underlying factors shaping students’ inclinations to voice concerns over medical errors.
Findings and Key Themes
The study revealed three primary themes. First, predisposing features, such as individual personality and past experiences, greatly influence students’ propensity to speak up. Second, psychological processes underscore how professional acumen, perceptions of clinical tasks, and ethical and legal frameworks factor into this behavior. Finally, contextual interaction describes the impact of patient needs, characteristics of supervisors, and the team climate. Notably, these themes do not operate in isolation; they intertwine to guide how students approach speaking up.
– Individual characteristics and earlier experiences frame initial attitudes toward addressing errors.
– Confidence in professional competence bolsters willingness to voice concerns.
– Anxiety about hierarchical repercussions and fear of critique impede open dialogue.
– A supportive team environment enhances communication readiness.
Confidence in one’s abilities and a sense of duty enhance the likelihood of students speaking up, though cultural hierarchies and apprehension about critiques pose significant barriers. Educational frameworks intend to bolster patient advocacy through ethical and legal training; yet these can inadvertently lead to self-preserving behavior, discouraging overt communication about errors. Medical educators might find it beneficial to scrutinize the implicit teachings within ethical frameworks and clinical training that subtly disincentivize open discussion of medical errors. Doing so could align educational goals more closely with the practical necessities of patient safety, ultimately fostering a more transparent and error-preventive clinical culture.
This article has been prepared with the assistance of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more details, please refer to our Terms and Conditions. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author.
