This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

David W. Bates, MD, MSc
Brigham and Women's Hospital

David J. Cullen, MD
Massachusetts General Hospital

Lucian L. Leape, MD
Harvard School of Public Health Boston, Mass

JAMA. 1996;275(1):34-35.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.

—Dr Dickey and Mr Hatlie challenge our estimates of the extent of iatrogenic injury as "sweeping and scientifically invalid" because they are based "solely" on the MPS. Unfortunately, those results were consistent with results from a 1975 California study that showed an adverse event rate of 4.2%. Both undoubtedly underestimated the extent of injury because they relied on information recorded in medical records. As every physician knows, all events are not recorded in the medical record. In addition, neither study measured adverse events in the outpatient setting. A recent study in Australia, using MPS methodology, found an adverse event rate of 16%.¹

We agree with Dickey and Hatlie that the health care system is safe for the vast majority of patients and that health care professionals are dedicated to preventing injuries, points we have made repeatedly to the press and public. We have never questioned the commitment . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?