Skip to main content

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

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

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. 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