Poll Finding

Five Years After IOM Report On Medical Errors, Nearly Half Of All Consumers Worry About The Safety Of Their Health Care

Published: Nov 15, 2004

Embargoed for release until:Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2004, 9:30 a.m. ET

For further information contact:Craig Palosky, KFF, (202) 347-5270Chris Peacock, KFF, (650) 854-9400Howard Holland, AHRQ, (301) 427-1857

FIVE YEARS AFTER IOM REPORT ON MEDICAL ERRORS, NEARLY HALF OF ALL CONSUMERS WORRY ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THEIR HEALTH CARE

One in Three People Say They Or A Family Member Have Experienced A Medical Error; One in Five Say It Was “Serious”

People with Chronic Conditions Most Likely to Report Problems

Of Those Reporting Medical Errors with Serious Consequences, One in Seven Report Filing Malpractice Lawsuits

Washington, D.C. – Five years after a groundbreaking Institute of Medicine report focused attention on medical errors in hospitals, Americans say that they do not believe that the nation’s quality of care has improved. Four in 10 (40%) people say the quality of health care has gotten worse in the past five years, while one in six (17%) say the quality of care has gotten better and nearly four in 10 (38%) say it has stayed the same, according to a new survey by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the Harvard School of Public Health.

The survey of 2,012 adults, which was conducted by telephone from July 7 to Sept. 5, 2004, also finds that nearly half (48%) of U.S. residents say they are concerned about the safety of the medical care that they and their families receive, and more than half (55%) say they are dissatisfied with the quality of health care in this country – up from 44% who reported the same in a survey conducted four years ago. The survey finds that people with chronic health conditions are considerably more likely than other consumers to express concerns about their quality of care and report having personal experiences with medical errors.

These perceptions exist despite the efforts by hospitals, doctors, health plans and purchasers to reduce medical errors and improve the quality of care in the wake of the 1999 Institute of Medicine report, “To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System.” The report concluded that hospital-based medical errors were the eighth leading cause of death in the United States and that the primary cause was problems with the health system itself rather than the performance of individual doctors, nurses, and other providers.

“This survey shows that the challenge is not just to improve patient safety, but to convince the public that real progress is being made,” Kaiser Family Foundation President Drew Altman said.

Personal experiences with medical errors

After being read a common definition of a medical error, about one in three people (34%) say that they or a family member had experienced a medical error at some point in their life. This includes 21% of all Americans who say that a medical error caused “serious health consequences” such as death (8%), long-term disability (11%) or severe pain (16%). About one in seven of those who said the error caused serious health consequences (14%, or 3% of all Americans) say that they or their family filed a malpractice lawsuit as a result of the error. Of those who were involved in a medical error, 28% (9% of all Americans) say the doctor or other health professional involved told them about the medical error.

The survey found that half (50%) of all people with chronic conditions say that they have experienced a medical error in their own care or that of a family member – far more than those without chronic illnesses (30%).

Consumer views of policy solution

More than nine in 10 Americans (92%) say that reporting of serious medical errors should be required, and most (63%) want this information released publicly. Almost nine in 10 (88%) say that physicians should be required to tell a patient if a preventable medical error resulted in serious harm in the patient’s own care.

Consumers are most likely to cite workload, inadequate staffing and poor communication among healthcare providers as causes of medical errors – with about three in four (74%) saying workload, stress or fatigue of health professionals is a very important cause of medical errors. Nearly as many say that doctors not having enough time with patients (70%), too few nurses in hospitals (69%) and health professionals not working together or not communicating as a team (68%) are very important causes of medical errors.

When asked about a variety of potential solutions, 79% say giving doctors more time to spend with patients would be “very effective” in reducing preventable medical errors, while nearly as many say that requiring hospitals to develop systems to avoid medical errors (72%) and better training of health professionals (also 72%) would be “very effective.” Just over half (51%) say that more use of computerized medical records instead of paper records for ordering drugs and medical tests would be very effective.

“Many steps have been taken to improve patient safety and the greater use of health information technology is one of the most promising developments in this area,” said AHRQ director Carolyn M. Clancy, M.D. “However, these are largely ‘system-related’ improvements that aren’t always apparent, even though consumers may recognize their importance. Our challenge is to show the connection between these kinds of changes and improving the care patients receive, while at the same time expanding and accelerating those efforts.

Quality information that consumers want

The survey finds that more than one out of three (35%) people say they have seen information comparing the quality of health plans, hospitals or doctors in the past year – a higher share than in 2000 (27%).

Almost one in five (19%) of all Americans say they have used comparative quality information about health plans, hospitals or other providers to make decisions about their care – up from 12% in 2000. More specifically, 14% of consumers say they have used quality information to choose health plans, 8% to choose hospitals and 6% to choose doctors.

Consumers generally say that data about medical errors, numbers of malpractice cases and professional experience is most likely to be useful at assessing quality of care. For example, seven in 10 (70%) say that information about medical errors or mistakes would tell them “a lot” about the quality of care in a hospital. Consumers are nearly as likely to say that information on how many times a hospital has performed a particular test or surgery (65%) and information on how many patients die after having surgery (57%) tells them “a lot”. Fewer, but still about half, say that how patients rate the quality of care of a hospital (52%) or the number of patients who do not get standard recommended treatments (47%) tells them “a lot” about quality.

“The public isn’t getting the quality information it wants,” said Robert J. Blendon, Sc.D. Professor of Health Policy at the Harvard School of Public Health. “If the information they wanted the most were to become available, people might use it more often in the choices they make about their own health care.”

When looking for information on quality of care, people are most likely to say they would ask their doctor, nurse or other health professional (65% said they were very likely to do this), or ask their friends and family (65%). Fewer would go online (37%), contact someone at their health plan (36%), contact a state agency (18%) or refer to a section of a newspaper or magazine (16%). About one-third (36%) of people age 65 and older say they would be very likely to contact the Medicare program.

People also are more likely to chose a hospital by what is familiar (61%) rather than by a high rating (33%), but are split as to what is more important when choosing a surgeon – whether a surgeon has treated a friend or family member without any problems (48%) or received high ratings (46%). They are also divided as to which is more important when choosing a health plan – whether it is recommended by a friend (45%) or if it is rated highly by experts (49%).

Steps To Promote Safety

The survey also suggests significant numbers of Americans say they have taken precautions to reduce the risks of experiencing a medical error when seeking treatment. For example, the new survey finds that:

  • Almost seven in 10 (69%) say they have checked the medication that a pharmacist gave them with the prescription that their doctor wrote and nearly half (48%) say they have brought a list of all of their medications, including non-prescription drugs, to a medical appointment;
  • Almost seven in 10 (69%) say they have called to check on the results of medical tests;
  • About two in three (66%) say they have talked to a surgeon about the details of surgery, such as exactly what the surgeon will do, how long it will take, and the recovery process;
  • More than four in 10 people (43%) say they have brought a friend or relative with them to ask questions and help them understand what the doctor was telling them;
  • More than one in three (37%) say they have consulted their doctor about the hospital that they use.

AHRQ recommends these types of precautions to enable patients and their families to reduce their risk of experiencing medical errors. AHRQ worked with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and other federal partners to develop a resource called, Five Steps to Safer Health Care that includes these precautions and others. More information about Five Steps to Safer Health Care” is available at http://www.ahrq.gov/consumer/5steps.htm .

In addition to the new survey, Dr. Altman, Dr. Clancy and Dr. Blendon also collaborated on a perspectives column published in the Nov. 11 New England Journal of Medicine. The column, “Improving Patient Safety – Five Years After the IOM Report,” examines patient safety efforts and public opinion trends.

Methodology

The National Survey on Consumers’ Experiences With Patient Safety and Quality Information is a joint project of the Kaiser Family Foundation, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and the Harvard School of Public Health. Representatives of the organizations worked together to develop the survey questionnaire and analyze the results. The survey was conducted by telephone from July 7 to September 5, 2004 among a randomly selected nationally representative sample of 2,012 adults 18 years or older. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish by Princeton Survey Research Associates. The margin of sampling error is +/-2 percentage points overall. The margin of sampling error will be higher for results based on subsets of respondents. Sampling error is only one of many potential sources of error in this or any public opinion poll. Before answering questions on medical errors, respondents were all read a common definition of medical errors. They were told, “Sometimes when people are ill and receive medical care, mistakes are made that result in serious harm, such as death, disability, or additional or prolonged treatment. These are called medical errors. Some of these errors are preventable, while others may not be.” Trend data is from the Kaiser Family Foundation/Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Americans as Health Care Consumers: The Role of Quality Information (1996), 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 (2000), and the Harvard School of Public Health/Kaiser Family Foundation Medical Errors: Practicing Physician and Public Views (2002).

A webcast of this event will be provided by kaisernetwork.org, a free service of the Kaiser Family Foundation. The webcast, complete survey findings and related resources are available at http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/pomr111704pkg.cfm .

The Kaiser Family Foundation is a non-profit, private operating foundation dedicated to providing information and analysis on health care issues to policymakers, the media, the health care community, and the general public. The Foundation is not associated with Kaiser Permanente or Kaiser Industries.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality is the lead Federal agency charged with supporting research designed to improve the quality of health care, reduce its cost, address patient safety and medical errors, and broaden access to essential services.

Harvard School of Public Health is dedicated to advancing the public’s health through learning, discovery, and communication. More than 300 faculty members are engaged in teaching and training the 800-plus student body in a broad spectrum of disciplines crucial to the health and well being of individuals and populations around the world. Programs and projects range from the molecular biology of AIDS vaccines to the epidemiology of cancer; from risk analysis to violence prevention; from maternal and children’s health to quality of care measurement; from health care management to international health and human rights.

# # #

State AIDS Programs and the Medicare Modernization Act (MMA):  A Conference Call Discussion for State AIDS Directors and ADAP Coordinators

Published: Nov 8, 2004

State AIDS Programs and the Medicare Modernization Act (MMA): A Conference Call Discussion for State AIDS Directors and ADAP Coordinators

November 10, 2004 at 2pm ESTKaiser Family Foundation & The National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors

Medicare is estimated to cover almost one in five people living with HIV/AIDS in care. Although Medicare provides broad coverage of basic health care services, it has high cost-sharing requirements, no cap on out-of-pocket spending, and doesn’t cover services such as long-term care and, until 2006, has no prescription drug benefit. Medicare beneficiaries must therefore rely on supplemental sources of coverage to fill in gaps, particularly Medicaid, the nation’s major health insurance program for low-income Americans. The AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP) is also an important source for prescription drugs for Medicare beneficiaries with HIV/AIDS.

The implementation of the Medicare Modernization Act’s new Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit in 2006 will likely have a significant impact on Medicaid, ADAP, and other state programs that provide coverage and services to people with HIV/AIDS. In some cases, it may relieve pressure on these programs; in others, it may increase pressure and demand. Some beneficiaries may see an improvement in their prescription drug coverage; others may not. Although there is still a great deal of uncertainty, states and beneficiaries will likely face a complex, new terrain that may prove difficult to navigate.

To discuss the potential implications of the MMA for State AIDS Programs and people living with HIV/AIDS, the National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors and the Kaiser Family Foundation are convening a conference call with State AIDS Directors and ADAP Program Managers.

What: A Conference Call Briefing for State AIDS Directors and ADAP Program Managers

When: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 2:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. EST Presentation and Q&A

How: Via conference call. The conference call-in number is 1-866-279-1566. Hit the * key, followed by the meeting number (5677146), followed again by the * key.

Background materials for the call are available below:

Conference Call Agenda

Medicare Drug Benefit Update Presentation

Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act Implementation Timeline

Grievance and Appeals Procedures: An Analysis of the MMA and Proposed Regulations

The Effect of Formularies and Other Cost Management Tools on Access to Medications: An Analysis of the MMA and Proposed Regulations

The New Medicare Drug Benefit: Potential Effects of Pharmacy Management Tools on Access to Medications

Fact Sheet: Medicare and HIV/AIDS

Medicare Prescription Drug Law Fact Sheet

Medicare Advantage Fact Sheet

Medicare at a Glance Fact Sheet

HIV/AIDS in Georgia

Published: Nov 2, 2004

Two reports – “Survey of Georgia Residents on HIV/AIDS” and “Georgia’s Minority Health and Health Disparities Report – Facing a Crisis” – show the disproportionate impact HIV is having on minorities in Georgia, and important differences in how minorities view HIV/AIDS compared to whites.

The reports were released at a November 30, 2004 briefing held by the National Center for Primary Care (NCPC) at the Morehouse School of Medicine in partnership with the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Survey of Georgia Residents on HIV/AIDS: Summary and Chartpack

Georgia’s Minority Health and Health Disparities Report – Facing a Crisis (NCPC)

HIV/AIDS Policy in Georgia (NCPC)

Agenda

Speaker Biographies

 

Survey of Georgia Residents on HIV/AIDS: Summary and Chartpack

Published: Nov 2, 2004

The public in Georgia, and particularly African Americans, are concerned about HIV/AIDS as a problem facing the nation. Most believe that the U.S. is losing ground when it comes to HIV/AIDS, and most would like to see the government increase spending to fight the disease in the U.S.

This statewide representative survey examines Georgians views on the HIV/AIDS epidemic in their state and local communities, their knowledge and misconceptions about HIV/AIDS, Georgia’s HIV testing rates, and public opinion on US spending on domestic HIV/AIDS and was conducted in spring 2004.

Summary and Chartpack (.pdf)

World AIDS Day 2004

Published: Nov 1, 2004

World AIDS Day began in 1988 to focus global attention on the HIV/AIDS epidemic across countries, organizations and governments. The theme of focuses on women, girls, and HIV and AIDS and seeks to explore how gender inequality fuels the AIDS epidemic.

The links on this page will connect you to the Foundation’s latest research, analysis, and innovative public health campaigns related to HIV/AIDS and to a range of other domestic and international World AIDS Day resources and activities:

HIV/AIDS Policy

The Kaiser Family Foundation serves as a resource for information about HIV/AIDS policy, public opinion and knowledge about the disease, and media-based partnerships. The Foundation’s work in HIV/AIDS is focused on informing the national policy discussion about the HIV/AIDS epidemic within the context of a changing treatment environment and health care delivery and financing system. Our work focuses on issues of health care coverage, financing, access to care, and prevention, particularly for those increasingly impacted by the epidemic, including women, people of color, and young people.

Previous World AIDS Day Coverage:

World AIDS Day 2003World AIDS Day 2002World AIDS Day 2001World AIDS Day 2000

Estimates of Medicare Beneficiaries’ Out-of-Pocket Drug Spending in 2006

Published: Nov 1, 2004

This report projects the impact of the new Medicare drug benefit on out-of-pocket spending for people who enroll in 2006. This analysis from November 2004 estimates that 6.9 million beneficiaries are projected to be affected by the coverage gap (the so-called “doughnut hole”) in the standard Part D drug benefit. This estimate is based on projected enrollment in Part D plans of 29 million (Congressional Budget Office, July 2004), prior to implementation of the drug benefit and actual enrollment in Part D plans.

Executive Summary (.pdf)

Report (.pdf)

Poll Finding

National Survey on Consumers’ Experiences With Patient Safety and Quality Information — Toplines

Published: Oct 31, 2004

National Survey on Consumers’ Experiences With Patient Safety and Quality Information — Toplines

This document includes the complete toplines from a national survey assessing Americans’ perceptions about the quality of health care, their awareness and reported usage of information in making their health care choices, and their experiences with their health care providers five years after the Institute of Medicine’s landmark report on medical errors. The Kaiser Family Foundation, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Harvard School of Public Health collaborated on the survey.

Survey Toplines (.pdf)

 

Covering New Americans:  A Review of Federal and State Policies Related to Immigrants’ Eligibility and Access to Publicly Funded Health Insurance

Published: Oct 31, 2004

Covering New Americans: A Review of Federal and State Policies Related to Immigrants’ Eligibility and Access to Publicly Funded Health Insurance

This brief provides an overview of health coverage challenges facing immigrants, the federal rules regarding immigrants’ eligibility for Medicaid and SCHIP, and state efforts to provide replacement coverage for immigrants who are ineligible for Medicaid and SCHIP.

Report (.pdf)

Poll Finding

National Survey on Consumers’ Experiences With Patient Safety and Quality Information — Summary and Chartpack

Published: Oct 31, 2004

National Survey on Consumers’ Experiences With Patient Safety and Quality Information — Summary and Chartpack

This chartpack summarizes key findings from a national survey assesses Americans’ perceptions about the quality of health care, their awareness and reported usage of information in making their health care choices, and their experiences with their health care providers five years after the Institute of Medicine’s landmark report on medical errors. The Kaiser Family Foundation, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Harvard School of Public Health collaborated on the survey.

Survey Summary and Chartpack (.pdf)

 

Poll Finding

National Survey on Consumers’ Experiences With Patient Safety and Quality Information

Published: Oct 31, 2004

National Survey on Consumers’ Experiences With Patient Safety and Quality Information

This survey assesses Americans’ perceptions about the quality of health care, their awareness and reported usage of information in making their health care choices, and their experiences with their health care providers five years after the Institute of Medicine’s landmark report on medical errors. The Kaiser Family Foundation, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Harvard School of Public Health collaborated on the survey.

News Release

Summary and Chartpack

Toplines

The survey was released at a November 17, 2004 briefing:

Agenda

Speaker Biographies