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