CLINICAL & BASIC RESEARCH

SQU Med J, February 2012, Vol. 12, Iss. 1, pp. 86-92, Epub. 7th Feb 12. 
Submitted 8th May 11
Revision Req. 23rd Aug 11, Revision recd. 15th Sep 11
Accepted 30th Nov 11

ما هي خماوف املرضى من األخطاء الطبية يف قسم 
الطوارئ؟

ناهيد كيامنهر، مانى مفيدى، ح�سني �سعيدى، مر�سيه حاجى بيَكى، مهدى ر�سايى
امللخ�ص: الهدف: زادت املخاوف من الأخطاء الطبية يف الآونة الأخرية، وفهم كيفية ت�سور املر�سى للخطاأ الطبي ي�ساعد مقدمي الرعاية 
ال�سحية على تبديد املخاوف املتعلقة بال�سالمة، وزيادة ر�سا املر�سى. هدف هذه الدرا�سة هو تقييم خماوف املر�سى من الأخطاء الطبية 
وعالقتها مع خ�سائ�س املري�س ور�ساه. الطريقة: اأجريت هذه الدرا�سة الو�سفية املقطعية يف ق�سم الطوارئ يف م�ست�سفى جامعي خالل 
من  كل  يف  ر�ساهم  وم�ستويات  الطبية  الأخطاء  من  املر�سى  خماوف  لتقييم  ا�ستبيان  ا�ستخدام  مت   .2008 اأكتوبر  يف  واحد  اأ�سبوع  فرتة 
مقابلة اأولية وعن طريق الهاتف بعد 7 اأيام من اإخراج املري�س من امل�ست�سفى. مت جمع البيانات وحتليلها بوا�سطة مربع كاي وفح�س تي 
والنحدار اللوج�ستي. النتائج: من �سمن 638 مري�سا مت ا�ستبيانهم ، اأظهر %61.6 منهم ارتياحهم بدرجة جيدة اإىل ممتازة؛ بينما بنّي 
93 مري�سا ]%14.6[ درجة ر�ساهم باأنها �سعيفة؛ و 152 مري�سا ]%23.8[ باأنها متو�سطة؛ و 296 ]%46.4[ باأنها جيدة؛ و 79 
على  واحد  طبي  خطاأ  وقوع  من  قلقني   )95% الثقة  حدود  مع   ،  44.5-52%( املر�سى  من   48.3% كان  ممتازة.  باأنها   ]15.2%[
الأقل. هناك عالقة وا�سحة بني معدل الر�سا العام ووجود قلق خلطاأ طبي واحد على الأقل )مربع كاي ، P >0.001(. اخلال�سة: اأظهرت 
هذه الدرا�سة اأن العديد من املر�سى كانوا قلقني من الأخطاء الطبية يف حالت الطوارئ اخلا�سة بهم. ب�سبب ال�سغوط املوجودة يف اأق�سام 
تلك  يف  العاملة  الطبية  الأطر  وتثقيف  املري�س،  ملخاوف  اأف�سل  فهم  خالل  من  ر�ساهم  وزيادة  املر�سى  �سالمة  حت�سني  ميكن  الطوارئ، 

الأق�سام وحت�سني العالقة بني املري�س والطبيب.
مفتاح الكلمات: خدمة الطوارئ، م�ست�سفى، اأخطاء طبية ، مر�سى، ر�سا، مري�س، اإيران. 

abstract: Objectives: Concerns about medical errors have recently increased. An understanding of how patients 
conceptualise medical error would help health care providers to allay safety concerns and increase patient satisfaction. The 
aim of this study was to evaluate patients’ worries about medical errors and their relationship with patient characteristics 
and satisfaction. Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was done in the Emergency Department (ED) of a 
university hospital over a one week period in October 2008. A questionnaire was used to assess patients’ worries about 
medical errors and their satisfaction levels both at an initial interview and by telephone 7 days after discharge. Data were 
gathered and analysed by χ2, t-tests and logistic regression. Results: Of 638 patients interviewed, 61.6% declared their 
satisfaction rate as good to excellent; (93 [14.6%] as poor; 152 [23.8%] as fair; 296 [46.4%] as good; 97 [15.2%] as 
excellent). A total of 48.3% of patients (44.5–52%, with confidence interval 95%) were concerned about the occurrence 
of at least one medical error. There was a clear relationship between the general satisfaction rate and having at least 
one concern about a medical error (Chi-square, P <0.001). Conclusion: This study showed that many patients were 
concerned about medical errors during their emergency care. Due to the stressful situation in EDs, patients’ safety and 
satisfaction could be improved by a better understanding of patient concerns, education of ED staff and an improvement 
in the patient-doctor relationship.

Keywords: Emergency department; Medical errors; Patient concern; Satisfaction; Iran.

What are Patients’ Concerns about Medical 
Errors in an Emergency Department?
Nahid Kianmehr,1 *Mani Mofidi,2 Hossein Saidi,2 Marzieh HajiBeigi,3 Mahdi Rezai2 

CLINICAL & BASIC RESEARCH

1Department of Internal Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Iran, and Department of Internal Medicine, Hazrat 
e Rasool Akram Hospital, Tehran, Iran; 2Department of Emergency Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Iran, and 
Emergency Department, Hazrat e Rasool Akram Hospital, Tehran, Iran; 3Department of  Forensic Medicine, Tehran University of 
Medical Sciences, Iran, and Hazrat e Rasool Akram Hospital, Tehran, Iran
Corresponding Author e-mail: m-mofidi@sina.tums.ac.ir

Advances in Knowledge
 This article showed that nearly 50% of emergency patients at Hazrat e Rasool Akram Hospital, Teheran, Iran, had concerns about at 

least one type of medical error. 

Applications to Patient Care
 It is important to decrease concern about medical errors as this will have a positive effect on patient satisfaction.



Nahid Kianmehr, Mani Mofidi, Hossein Saidi, Marzieh HajiBeigi, Mahdi Rezai

Clinical and Basic Research | 87

Emergency departments (ED) are busy environments. Confrontation with a wide variety of injuries and illnesses 
causes a very stressful climate both for patients and 
physicians.1 There are many causes of the concerns 
that can ultimately lead to patient dissatisfaction. 
Overcrowding, the limitations of nurses and 
resources, the seriousness of illnesses or injuries 
and the presence of too many patients who require 
acute inpatient care, can all disturb patients.  
Regardless of how well trained and experienced the 
emergency physicians are, they can make mistakes 
as they are only human.2 The probability of medical 
errors is increased by the acute and unpredictable 
presentations of illness, and by having to work in a 
busy and overcrowded environment.3,4 

The worldwide expansion of medical knowledge 
through different kinds of media, has led many 
people to believe that medical care is not totally 
safe and that they can become victims of medical 
errors.5 In one study, 75% of patients experienced 
concerns about medical errors during their 
hospitalisation.6 In another study 39% of patients 
were anxious about the occurrence of at least one 
medical error.7 Unaddressed patients concerns can 
lead to dissatisfaction, an unwillingness to return to 
or recommend this hospital to their relatives, non-
compliance with medical advice, and an increase in 
medico-legal claims.8,9 

Patients expect to be aware when, where and 
how malpractice issues happen. They also want to 
know the reasons for the occurrence and ways to 
prevent errors.10 Studies of the delivery of health 
care services are producing improved safety 
suggestions. Some important aspects of improved 
care are good teamwork, anticipation of unexpected 
events, improving communication, providing a 
conducive learning environment, updating drug 
delivery systems, addressing patient concerns 
and engaging patients in error prevention.10,11 The 
unique characteristics of emergency departments 
make this environment a suitable place to study 
patient concerns about medical errors. This study 
was conducted to determine ED patients’ concerns 
about medical errors and their relationship with 
their general characteristics and satisfaction status. 

Methods
This study was a descriptive cross-sectional study, 

conducted in the ED of Hazrat e Rasoul Akram 
Hospital in Tehran, Iran, during a 7 day period in 
October 2008. The ED has an annual intake of 50,000 
patients with both medical and surgical complaints. 
All adult patients who presented to our ED during 
the study period were included in the study. Patients 
with a decreased level of consciousness, who were 
chemically intoxicated, aged <18 years, or those 
who were unwilling to participate in the survey 
were excluded from the study.

All of the included patients were interviewed 
with a questionnaire about their medical error 
concerns and their satisfaction with different 
components of ED services along the lines of 
patient satisfaction surveys carried out in previous 
studies.12–14 Questions covered subjects such as 
triage performance, quality of care provided, physical 
environment, nursing and physician behaviour, and 
the general opinion about the ED experience. The 
answers were rated on a five point Likert scale: 5 = 
excellent, 4 = very good, 3 = good, 2 = fair, 1 = poor.  
Additional information, including age, sex, type of 
medical insurance, educational level, main physical 
complaints, time of admission, and length of stay in 
the ED, were extracted from the patients’ files and 
recorded. During the survey testing phase, in order 
to tune the questionnaire to our culture, 8 related 
concerns, which were proposed in the Burroughs, 
et al. study, were also investigated for 30 patients.1 
They were also asked one open-ended question 
about their other concerns during their stay in the 
ED. Based on these patients’ views, we then added 
two items: mistakes by medical students and ED 
waiting/treatment time. 

The same questionnaire was administered in 
the ED and then again, 7 days after discharge, by 
telephone interview. For the latter, up to 10 attempts 
were made to contact each patient. For patients 
who were admitted to the ward, their follow-up 
questionnaire was completed at their bedside. In 
the questionnaire, patients were asked whether 
they experienced any of the following medical 
errors during their hospital stay (coded as yes/no): 
prescription of wrong drugs; operational problem 
of medical equipment; nursing mistake; physician 
mistake; medical student mistake; identity mistaken 
for that of another patient; laboratory test mistakes; 
improper diagnosis; lengthy waiting/treatment 
times, and fall from hospital bed (concern that they 
might fall). 



What are Patients’ Concerns about Medical Errors in an Emergency Department?

88 | SQU Medical Journal, February 2012, Volume 12, Issue 1

Table 1: Demographic data and clinical characteristics 
of participants

n (%)Variable

40.4±18.5Age±SD in years 

345 (54)
293 (46)

Sex:
Male
Female

6.37±7.4Length of ED stay, in hours

141 (22.1%)Education (university degree)

370 (58%)Insurance holder

Outcome:

366 (57.4%)Discharge

102 (16%)LAMA

170 (26.6%)Admitted to ward

Overall satisfaction

97 (15.2%)Excellent

296 (46.4%)Good

152 (23.8%)Fair

93 (14.6%)Poor

Legend: SD = standard deviation; ED = emergency department; 
LAMA = left against medical advice.

Data analysis was performed using the 
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, 
Version 14, IBM, Chicago, Illinois, USA) to answer 
the following main questions: 1) Which medical 
errors are the greatest patient concerns? 2) Is 
there any correlation between medical errors and 
patient characteristics? and 3) Do patient concerns 
affect patient satisfaction? The chi-square test was 
used for categorical variables, the unpaired t-test 
for continuous variables and multivariable logistic 
regression for prediction. The study was approved 
by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine 
of Tehran University of Medical Sciences. The 
researchers obtained consent from patients for 
participation in the study.

Results
A total of 638 (75%) of the 850 patients included in 
the study completed both the initial questionnaire 
interview as well as the 7-day follow-up telephone 
interview which repeated the same questions. 
Patients’ characteristics are summarised in Table 1. 
A total of 61.6% of patients had a satisfaction rate 
of good to excellent; (93 [14.6%]  poor; 152 [23.8%]  

fair; 296 [46.4%]  good; 97 [15.2%] excellent). A total 
of 48.3% of patients (44.5–52%, with confidence 
interval 95%) were concerned about the occurrence 
of at least one medical error. Some of them reported 
more than one. If patients’ responses changed 
between the initial questionnaire and the 7-day 
follow-up questionnaire, we took into account 
all of the concerns mentioned by the patient. The 
percentages of patients’ concerns are shown in 
Figure 1 as: prolonged ED stay (19%); medical 
student related error (18.7%); errors with equipment 
malfunction (8.6%); improper diagnosis (7.1%); 
injury due to fall from hospital bed (5.6%); physician’ 
fault in management (4.5%); identity mistaken 
for that of another patient (4.4%); laboratory test 
mistake (2.7%), and nursing mistake (0.6%) 

We assessed the factors that might have affected 
patient satisfaction. This revealed that the gender of 
patients (chi-square, P = 0.141), their educational 
grade (chi-square, P = 0.110), age (t, P = 0.191), and 
length of stay in ED (t, P = .404) did not have any 
significant relationship with patient satisfaction; 
however, the outcome of patients (discharged, 
admitted to wards or those who left against 
medical advice) (chi-square, P <0.001), and having 
medical insurance (chi-square, P = 0.20) did have a 
significant relationship with patient satisfaction. 

We found, on the one hand, that only four 
(3.92%) of the 102 patients (16% of the patients 
interviewed) who left the ED against medical advice 
(LAMA) were satisfied with their care. This means 
that near all of these patients were unsatisfied; they 
maybe went to another medical centre for continued 
treatment. On the other hand, for patients who 
were discharged by physicians or admitted to a 
ward the satisfaction rates were 68.85% and 80.58% 
respectively. Of the patients who had a university 
degree, 24.14% were satisfied with their treatment 
while 18.77% of those without a university degree 
were satisfied. This difference was not, however, 
statistically significant (P = 0.110). A total of 
52.92% of female patients were satisfied with their 
treatment. Although they had less concerns than 
males, this difference was not statistically significant 
(P = 0.141).

Table 2 shows the relationship between patient 
characteristics and patient concerns. Females had 
greater concerns about improper diagnosis, being 
mistaken for another patient and falling from a 
hospital bed, while males were worried about 



Nahid Kianmehr, Mani Mofidi, Hossein Saidi, Marzieh HajiBeigi, Mahdi Rezai

Clinical and Basic Research | 89

nursing mistakes, equipment malfunction and 
physician error. Patients with university degrees 
were markedly more worried about physician error, 
being mistaken for another patient and improper 
diagnosis, but less worried about equipment 
malfunction. Older participants were more worried 
about medical student error, falling from a hospital 
bed and being mistaken for another patient, but 
younger patients were more concerned about 
equipment malfunction and nursing mistakes. 
Some of the patients left the hospital without 
completing the diagnosis or treatment process. They 
were significantly more worried about improper 
diagnosis and nursing mistakes.

We conducted a multivariate analysis and 
found that female gender, leaving the ED against 
medical advice and having a university degree were 
independently predictive of having at least one 
concern about a medical error. Also, multivariate 
analysis demonstrated that having insurance, being 
discharged or admitted by a physician and having a 
university degree were independently predictive of 
high satisfaction [Tables 3 and 4].  There was a clear 
relationship between the general satisfaction rate 

and having at least one concern about a medical 
error (chi-square, P <0.001). 

Discussion
Most of the time, EDs have too many acutely ill 
patients. This situation can be highly stressful for 
physicians, very disturbing for patients and lead to 
medical error. This study was conducted to evaluate 
the patient concerns about medical errors during 
their visit to the ED. In spite of overcrowding in our 
ED, the majority of patients expressed satisfaction 
with the medical care they received during their 
visit although 48.3% of them were concerned about 
occurrence of one medical error. In the study by 
Burroughs, 38% of patients experienced error 
related concerns.1 In other studies, the reported 
“medical error anxiety” rate was much higher.11,15

The following factors are suggested as the causes 
of the greatest concern about medical error which 
ultimately result in more dissatisfaction: severity 
of illness or pain; uncertain clinical diagnosis; 
prolonged ED stay; unclear or insufficient 

Table 2: Relationship between patient characteristic and patient concerns

Gender (male/
female) 

Insurance 
(without) %

University 
degree (+)%

Disposition 
(LAMA) %

%Age  (worried/ 
not worried) 
mean

Worried about at 
least one medical 
error 

54.54 / 45.46 
P = 0.056

42.86P = 0.674 
+, P = 0.674

28.9 
+, P <0.001*

21.42 
+, P <0.001*

41.01 / 39.86 
~, P = 0.433

Prolonged ED stay 47.93 / 52.07 
P = 0.725 

23.96 
+, P<0.001

23.14 
+, P = 0.759

20.66 
+, P = 0.119

37.74 / 41.04 
~, P = 0.078

Medical student 
related error

52.95 / 47.05 
P = 0.388

47.05 
+, P = 0.216

29.1 
+, P = 0.163

21 
+, P = 0.098

44.29 / 39.53 
~, P = 0.017*

Errors with 
equipment 
malfunction

89.1 / 10.9 
P <0.001*

61.82 
+, P = 0.002*

10.9 
+, P = 0.036*

14.55 
+, P = 0.760

27.3 / 41.65 
~, P <0.001*

Improper diagnosis 28.89 / 71.11 
P = 0.004*

64.45 
+, P = 0.002*

46.66 
+, P <0.001*

35.56 
+, P <0.001

41.64 / 40.32 
~, P = 0.646

Injury due to fall 
from hospital bed

25 / 75 Chi2, 
+, P = 0.003*

22.23 
+, P = 0.013*

13.9 
+, P = 0.222

0 
#, P = 0.004*

50.3 / 39.52 
~, P <0.001*

Physician' fault in 
management

72.41 / 27.59 
P=0.011*

58.62 
+, P = 0.064

44.82 
+, P = 0.003*

27.58 
#, P = 0.081

37.31 / 40.56 
~, P = 0.077 

Being mistaken for 
another patient

14.29 / 85.71 
P = <0.001*

0 
#, P <0.001

0 
#, P = 0.004*

0 
#, P = 0.018*

47.42 / 40.02 
~, P = 0.001*

Laboratory mistake 52.95 / 47.05 
P = 0.766

52.94 
+,P = 0.355

29.41 
+, P = 0.461

23.53 
#, P = 0.332

37.52 / 40.49 
~, P = 0.208

Nursing mistake 100 / 0 
P = 0.042*

100 
#, P = 0.018*

0 
#, P = 0.285

100 
#, P = 0.001*

35 / 40.45 
~, P <0.001*

Note: *statistically significant. Statistical tests used: + = chi2; # = Fisher's exact; ~ = T test.
Legend: SD = standard deviation; ED = emergency department; LAMA = left against medical advice.



What are Patients’ Concerns about Medical Errors in an Emergency Department?

90 | SQU Medical Journal, February 2012, Volume 12, Issue 1

Figure 1: Patients’ concerns about medical errors during emergency department visit.

Table 3: Multivariate analysis (binary logistic 
regression) predictive of being concerned about at least 
one medical error

B SE P 
value

Exp (B) 
(95% CI)

Male -0.347 0.163 0.033 0.707 (0.513–
0.973)

LAMA 0.824 0.228 <0.001 2.28 (1.458–
3.565)

Not 
having 
university 
degree

-0.778 0.199 <0.001 0.459 (0.311–
0.678)

Constant 0.580 0.197 0.003 1.78 

Legend: SE = standard error; CI = confidence interval; LAMA = 
left against medical advice.

Table 4: Multivariate analysis (binary logistic 
regression) predictive of high satisfaction

B SE P 
value

Exp (B) (95% 
CI)

Not 
having 
university 
degree

-0.632 0.254 0.013 0.531 (0.323–
0.874)

LAMA -4.295 0.524 <0.001 0.014 (0.005–
0.038)

Having 
insurance

0.588 0.194 0.003 1.80 (1.229–
2.634)

Constant 1.160 0.245 <0.001 3.190 

Legend: SE = standard error; CI = confidence interval; LAMA 
= left against medical advice.

explanation from nursing or physician, and unclear 
management plan16–20 In our study, younger patients 
were more concerned than the older ones. This 
finding is similar to the Burroughs study.1 We 
surmise that the reason for this may be that elderly 
patients likely have more previous ED experiences 
and their illness may be less unexpected. In our 
study, patient concerns were correlated with length 
of ED stay. However, Thompson et al. reported that 
opinions regarding perceived waiting time rather 
than actual waiting time were correlated with 
patient satisfaction.21Although the ED length of 
stay was influenced by factors such as seriousness 

of illness, overcrowding, and the shortage of ED 
staff in relation to patient numbers, the probability 
of medical error occurrence increases with 
more prolonged ED stays.1 It has been shown 
that providing the public with ED waiting time 
information can  reduce lengthy ED waiting times.22 

Concerns about falling from a hospital bed were 
greater in older patients. This may originate from 
motor or equilibrium problems in this age group. 
Patient concerns had a direct relationship to 
educational levels. More educated patient had more 
complaints and paid more attention to the likelihood 
of medical errors. Patients who were discharged 
home were less concerned than the others, both on 



Nahid Kianmehr, Mani Mofidi, Hossein Saidi, Marzieh HajiBeigi, Mahdi Rezai

Clinical and Basic Research | 91

initial interview and at 7-day follow-up. As patients’ 
management could be influenced by factors such As 
the severity of their illnesses, it may have biased the 
patients’ level of concern. One common concern 
was the possibility of errors by medical students. 
A possible solution to this concern would be to 
inform patients about the advanced capability and 
sophisticated training which medical students 
receive before they work in clinical wards, and to 
underline that all student work is supervised by 
attending physicians. Another way to decrease 
concerns about student error would be to improve 
the knowledge and clinical expertise of medical 
students themselves in order to make them more 
proficient and self-confident. This is important as 
two studies found that patients were unwilling to 
have procedures done by medical students.23,24 

 Worries about medication mistakes have been 
found to be one of the major and fundamental 
reasons for patient concern.25 In the current study, 
the patients were not significantly worried about 
this error. Most errors were due to diminished 
attention levels occurring during prescribing, 
dispensing or administering drugs.26 Collaboration 
with the clinical pharmacist can reduced harmful 
medication error.27 

There is a significant relationship between the 
level of patient concerns and their satisfaction. More 
satisfied patients were less concerned about medical 
errors. Our results were consistent with previous 
studies.1,7 According to some studies, expanding 
patient involvement in medical care, teaching 
physicians about error disclosure techniques, and  
honesty and compassion were effective and valuable 
ways to avoid medical errors and increase patient 
satisfaction.28–31 Although informing patients about 
the nature and origin of medical errors is valuable, 
it is not possible in a stressful environments like ED. 
Regarding the influence of background anxieties 
on satisfaction in a majority of patients admitted 
to EDs,32 a timely recognition of their situation is 
mandatory.   

Although our study has valuable results 
about types of concerns, our suggestion is to 
repeat the study in other university hospital EDs, 
community, or private hospitals to compare the 
results for patients with different illnesses. Personal 
characteristics such as psychological, emotional 
and social factors, which were not considered in 
this study, could influence the level of patients’ 

concerns. Proper attention to these factors in future 
studies and also to other clinical situations may 
further define the factors contributing to patient 
concerns about medical errors.

Conclusion
Recognition of patient concerns and addressing 
them in a timely fashion appear to be an effective 
strategy for improving patient safety and satisfaction. 

c o n f l i c t o f i n t e r e s t
The authors declared no conflict of interest

References
1. Burroughs TE, Waterman AD, Gallagher TH, 

Waterman B, Adams D, Jeffe DB, et al. Patient 
concerns about medical errors in emergency 
departments. Acad Emerg Med 2005; 12:57−64.

2. Taylor TB. Threats to the health care safety net. Acad 
Emerg Med 2001; 8:1080−7.

3. Velianoff GD. Overcrowding and diversion in the 
emergency department: The health care safety net 
unravels. Nurs Clin North Am 2002; 37:59−66.

4. Risser DT, Rice MM, Salisbury ML, Simon R, Jay GD, 
Berns SD. The potential for improved teamwork to 
reduce medical errors in the emergency department. 
Ann Emerg Med 1999; 34:373−83.

5. National Patient Safety Foundation. Patient Safety: 
Your Role in Making Healthcare Safer. Chicago, IL: 
National Patient Safety Foundation, 2002.

6. The Kaiser Family Foundation/ Agency for Healthcare 
Research and Quality. National Survey on Americans 
as Health Care Consumers: An Update on the Role 
of Quality Information. Washington, DC: Agency for 
Healthcare Research and Quality, Dec 2000.

7. Burroughs TE, Waterman AD, Gallagher TH, 
Waterman B, Jeffe DB, Dunagan WC, et al. Patients’ 
concerns about medical errors during hospitalization. 
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2007; 33:5−14.

8. Hickson GB, Clayton EW, Githens PB, Sloan FA. 
Factors that prompted families to file medical 
malpractice claims following perinatal injuries. 
JAMA 1992; 267:1359−63.

9. Levinson W, Roter DL, Mullooly JP, Dull VT, 
Frankel RM, et al. Physician-patient communication: 
The relationship with malpractice claims among 
primary care physicians and surgeons. JAMA 1997; 
277:553−9.

10. Schenkel S. Promoting patient safety and prevention 
error in emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 
2000; 7:1204−22.

11. Thiagarajan RR, Bird GL, Harrington K, Charpie 



What are Patients’ Concerns about Medical Errors in an Emergency Department?

92 | SQU Medical Journal, February 2012, Volume 12, Issue 1

JR, Ohye RC, Steven JM, et al. Improving safety 
for children with cardiac disease, Cardiol Young 
2007;17:127−32.

12. Hedges JR, Trout A, Magnusson AR. Satisfied 
patients exiting the emergency department (SPEED) 
study. Acad Emerg Med 2002; 9:15−21.

13. Sun BC, Adams JG, Burstin HR. Validating a model 
of patient satisfaction withemergency care. Ann 
Emerg Med 2001; 38:527−32.

14. Trout A, Magnusson AR, Hedges JR. Patient 
satisfaction investigations and the emergency 
department: What does the literature say? Acad 
Emerg Med 2000; 7:695−709.

15. Byrne G, Heyman R. Patient anxiety in the accident 
and emergency department. J Clin Nurs 1997; 
6:289−95.

16. Boudreaux ED, Frieman J, Chansky ME, Baumann 
BM. Emergency department patient satisfaction: 
Examining the role of acuity. Acad Emerg Med 2004; 
11:162−8.

17. Boudreaux ED, O'Hea EL. Patient satisfaction in the 
emergency department: A review of the literature 
and implications for practice. J Emerg Med 2004; 
26:13−26.

18. Aragon SJ, Gesell SB. A patient satisfaction theory 
and its robustness across gender in emergency 
departments: A multigroup structural equation 
modeling investigation. Am J Med Qual 2004; 
18:229−41.

19. Arendt KW, Sadosty AT, Weaver AL, Brent CR, 
Boie ET. The left-without-being-seen patients: What 
would keep them from leaving? Ann Emerg Med 
2003; 42:317−23.

20. Sun BC, Burstin HR, Brennan TA. Predictors and 
outcomes of frequent emergency department users. 
Acad Emerg Med 2004; 10:320−8.

21. Thompson DA, Yarnold PR, Williams DR, Adams 
SL. Effects of actual waiting time, perceived waiting 
time, information delivery, and expressive quality on 
patient satisfaction in the emergency department. 

Ann Emerg Med 1996; 28:657−65.

22. Xie B, Youash S. The effects of publishing emergency 
department wait time on patient utilization patterns 
in a community with two emergency department 
sites: A retrospective, quasi-experiment design. Int 
J Emerg Med 2011; 4:29.

23. Graber MA, Pierre J, Charlton M. Patient opinions 
and attitudes toward medical student procedures in 
the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 2003; 
10:1329−33.

24. Graber MA, Wyatt C, Kasparek L, Xu Y. Does 
simulator training for medical students change 
patient opinions and attitudes toward medical 
student procedures in the emergency department? 
Acad Emerg Med 2005; 12:635−9.

25. Jenkins G, Johnston PE, Patel NR, Jones I, Aronsky 
D. The epidemiology of medication prescribing 
errors in the emergency department. AMIA Annu 
Symp Proc 2006:968.

26. Nichols P, Copeland T, Craib I, Hopkins P, Bruce DG. 
Learning from error: Identifying contributory causes 
of medication errors in an Australian hospital. Med J 
Aust 2008; 188:276−9.

27. Rothschild J, Churchill W, Erickson A, Munz K, 
Schuur JD, Salzberg CA, et al.  Medication errors 
recovered by emergency department pharmacists. 
Ann Emerg Med 2010; 55:513−21.

28. Hobgood C, Peck CR, Gilbert B, Chappell K, Zou B. 
Medical errors - what and when: What do patients 
want to know? Acad Emerg Med 2002; 9:1156−61.

29. Greenfield S, Kaplan S, Ware JE. Expanding patient 
involvement in care. Effects on patient outcomes. 
Ann Intern Med 1985; 102:520−8.

30. Benbassat J, Pilpel D, Tidhar M. Patients' preferences 
for participation in clinical decision making: A review 
of published surveys. Behav Med 1998; 24:81−8.

31. Hoffmann B, Rohe J. Patient safety and error 
management. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010; 107:92−9.

32.  Nirenberg TD, Baird J, Harrington M, Mello MJ, 
Woolard R, Longabaugh R. A cross sectional study 
of the self-report of stress among emergency 
department patients. J Emerg Trauma Shock 2009; 
2:155−8.