Malpractice claimed calls within the Swedish Healthcare Direct: a descriptive – comparative case study

BMC Nursing

Table 4 The central authority’s description of cause of malpractice claim (why)

Category¹	Sub-category	2011–2018	2003–2010
Communication, n 14 (2011–2018) 22 (2003–2010) p = 0.028¹	Inadequate anamnesis (too few questions)	7	10
	Communication failure	6	11
	Failure to listen to caller	1	12
	Talked through third party	4	1
	Did not follow up on caller’s understanding		1
Decision process 27 (2011–2018) 21 (2003–2010) p = 0.222¹	Probability diagnosis	7	8
	Did not follow/use CDSS	18	7
	Lack of overall picture of caller	1	5
	Did not follow guidelines	7	6
	Did not reconsider previous diagnosis	3	3
	Deficit in documentation of call	2
Organizational deficits 10 (2011–2018) 17 (2003–2010) p = 0.053¹	Lack of personal competence	1	9
	High workload	6	6
	Long work shift (> 9 h)	1
	Deficit in CDSS	3	5
	Work task not defined		3
	Lack of healthcare resources		1
	Lack of support	1

¹ In the analysis of the categories, each case’s reported causes or measures were dichotomized to 0) no causes or measures were reported in the sub-category and 1) one or more causes were reported for the case in the sub-category

ISSN: 1472-6955