PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Fernald, Douglas H. AU - Pace, Wilson D. AU - Harris, Daniel M. AU - West, David R. AU - Main, Deborah S. AU - Westfall, John M. TI - Event Reporting to a Primary Care Patient Safety Reporting System: A Report From the ASIPS Collaborative AID - 10.1370/afm.221 DP - 2004 Jul 01 TA - The Annals of Family Medicine PG - 327--332 VI - 2 IP - 4 4099 - http://www.annfammed.org/content/2/4/327.short 4100 - http://www.annfammed.org/content/2/4/327.full SO - Ann Fam Med2004 Jul 01; 2 AB - BACKGROUND We examined reports to a primary care, ambulatory, patient safety reporting system to describe types of errors reported and differences between anonymous and confidential reports. METHODS Applied Strategies for Improving Patient Safety (ASIPS) is a demonstration project designed to collect and analyze medical error reports from clinicians and staff in 2 practice-based research networks: the Colorado Research Network (CaReNet) and the High Plains Research Network (HPRN). A major component of ASIPS is a voluntary patient safety reporting system that accepts reports of errors anonymously or confidentially. Reports are coded using a multiaxial taxonomy. RESULTS Two years into this project, 33 practices with a total of 475 clinicians and staff have participated in ASIPS. Participants submitted 708 reports during this time (66% using the confidential reporting form). We successfully followed up on 84% of the confidential reports of interest within the allotted 10-day time frame. We ended up with 608 relevant, codable reports. Communication problems (70.8%), diagnostic tests (47%), medication problems (35.4%), and both diagnostic tests and medications (13.6%) were the most frequently reported errors. Confidential reports were significantly more likely than anonymous reports to contain codable data. CONCLUSION A safe and secure reporting system that relies on voluntary reporting from clinicians and staff can be successfully implemented in primary care settings. Information from confidential reports appears to be superior to that from anonymous reports and may be more useful in understanding errors and designing interventions to improve patient safety.