Abstract
Introduction Despite increased emphasis on education and training for patient safety in medical schools, there is little known about factors influencing decision making regarding patient safety behaviours. This study examined the nature and magnitude of factors which may influence opinions around patient safety related behaviours as a means of providing insights into how Australian doctors and medical students view these issues relative to members of the public.
Methods A national, multicentre, prospective, on-line cross sectional survey was conducted using responses to hypothetical clinical scenarios. Three cohorts were surveyed - Australian enrolled medical students, medical doctors and members of the public.
Participant responses were compared for the different contextual variables within the scenarios and the participants’ demographic characteristics – student, doctor, member of the public, gender and age (if public or doctors)/ seniority in the course (if a medical student).
Results In total there were 2602 medical student participants, 809 doctors and 503 members of the Australian public. Medical doctors were more likely than other cohorts to have statistically significant differences in how they viewed the acceptability of patient safety related behaviours; doctors were more tolerant of medical students not reporting concerning behaviours. Medical students’ opinions frequently demonstrated a ‘transition effect’, bridging between the doctors and publics’ attitudes, consistent with professional identity formation.
Conclusions Opinions on the acceptability of medical students’ patient safety related behaviours were influenced by the demographics of the cohort and the contextual complexity of the scenario. Although the survey used hypothetical scenarios, doctors and medical students’ opinions appear to be influenced by cognitive dissonances, biases and heuristics which may negatively affect patient safety.
‘Opinion is the medium between knowledge and ignorance’ Plato
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
Australian enrolled medical students (HREC RA/4/1/8014), Australian medical doctors (HREC RA/4/1/9195), and Australian public (HREC RA/4/1/9278).
Funding Statement
No funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was obtained from UWA for each of the three recruitment cohorts: Australian enrolled medical students (HREC RA/4/1/8014), Australian medical doctors (HREC RA/4/1/9195), and Australian public (HREC RA/4/1/9278).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Not available on other sites at present
