Tools and Resources[ Show all or clear results ]

Published articles related to CRP

Data from case studies support the fact that apologies from physicians to patients promote reconciliation and forgiveness. To promote a culture that supports apologizing and disclosure, 39 states, including Washington, D.C., are enacting apology policies to decrease the litigation problems surrounding medical malpractice. This article is delves into the implications surrounding the enactment of these laws. The article is divided into four parts. The first part of the article explains why states are passing apology laws and how they can help reduce lawsuits associated with medical malpractice. The second part presents data that supports the effectiveness of apology laws. The third part illustrates how apology laws affect various legal outcomes, especially the probability that medical providers will be presented with litigation fees. The fourth part of the article delves into the legal significance of their results. It is important to note that apology laws do not replace communication-and-resolution programs (CRPs), nor do they mitigate the existing data that these programs are effective in lowering the incidence rates of medical error claims.

Improving how health care providers respond to medical injury requires an understanding of patients’ experiences. Although many injured patients strongly desire to be heard, research rarely involves them. Institutional review boards worry about harming participants by asking them to revisit traumatic events, and hospital staff worry about provoking lawsuits. Institutions’ reluctance to approve this type of research has slowed progress toward responses to injuries that are better able to meet patients’ needs. In 2015-2016, we were able to surmount these challenges and interview 92 injured patients and families in the USA and New Zealand. This article explores whether the ethical and medico-legal concerns are, in fact, well-founded. Consistent with research about trauma-research-related distress, our participants’ accounts indicate that the pervasive fears about retraumatization are unfounded. Our experience also suggests that because being heard is an important (but often unmet) need for injured patients, talking provides psychological benefits and may decrease rather than increase the impetus to sue. Our article makes recommendations to institutional review boards and researchers. The benefits to responsibly conducted research with injured patients outweigh the risks to participants and institutions.

After Patient Ms. W received surgery on the wrong-site in her neck to relieve neck pain, she soon experienced adverse health effects, such as pain, distress, and lack of trust in healthcare providers. Ms. W’s experience illustrates the lack of communication between physicians and patients. The discrepancy is poor physician communication and refusal of apologizing for malpractice is due to fear of litigation. To improve patient-physician communication, health systems are encouraged to implement programs that encourage disclosure among healthcare professionals and trainees to improve overall healthcare quality.

The root causes of medical malpractice claims are deeper and closer to home than most in the medical community care to admit. The University of Michigan Health System’s experience suggests that a response by the medical community more directly aimed at what drives patients to call lawyers would effectively reduce claims, without compromising meritorious defenses. More importantly, honest assessments of medical care give rise to clinical improvements that reduce patient injuries. Using a true case example, this article compares the traditional approach to claims with what is being done at the University of Michigan. The case example illustrates how an honest, principle-driven approach to claims is better for all those involved—the patient, the healthcare providers, the institution, future patients, and even the lawyers.

Incident reporting systems (IRS) are used to identify medical errors in order to learn from mistakes and improve patient safety in hospitals. However, IRS contain only a small fraction of occurring incidents. A more comprehensive overview of medical error in hospitals may be obtained by combining information from multiple sources. The WHO has developed the International Classification for Patient Safety (ICPS) in order to enable comparison of incident reports from different sources and institutions. Incident reports collected from IRS, patient complaints and retrospective chart review in an academic acute care hospital were classified using the ICPS. In conclusion, IRS do not capture all incidents in hospitals and should be combined with complementary information about diagnostic error and delayed treatment from patient complaints and retrospective chart review. Since incidents that are not recorded in IRS do not lead to remedial and preventive action in response to IRS reports, healthcare centres that have access to different incident detection methods should harness information from all sources to improve patient safety.


The nature and consequences of patient and family emotional harm stemming from preventable medical error, such as losing a loved one or surviving serious medical injury, is poorly understood. Patients and families, clinicians, social scientists, lawyers, and foundation/policy leaders were brought together to establish research priorities for this issue during a one-day conference. They discussed pertinent issues, patient and family experiences after serious harmful events, including profound isolation, psychological distress, damaging aspects of medical culture, health care aversion, and negative effects on communities. The group also created a strategy for overcoming research barriers and actionable “Do Now” approaches to improve the patient and family experience while research is ongoing.

This article discusses the prevalence of disruptive behavior in the healthcare setting, which is defined as any act that influences a group’s intended outcome. Disruptive behavior often takes the form of angry outbursts and passive aggressive actions, especially in extremely stressful environments, such as emergency rooms. This behavior is often detrimental to the culture of safety and quality healthcare, as well as increases the risk of lawsuits. To combat disruptive behavior, five principles are are offered as guides to promoting professionalism and professional accountability in support of quality team-oriented care, patient safety and, if necessary, legal defense if disruptive colleagues challenge disciplinary interventions. 

Medical errors are associated with significant emotional, financial, physical and sociobehavioural impacts including reduced trust and willingness to seek healthcare. These impacts can last for years. The study sought to understand whether greater open communication is associated with reduced emotional impacts and decreased avoidance of doctors/facilities involved in the error.

Journal Article
Published articles related to CRP
Balancing “no blame” with accountability in patient safety

This article explains the challenge of balancing accountability and a “no blame” model in healthcare systems when promoting patient safety. Accountability is defined as taking responsibility for one’s actions. In this article, it is taking responsibility for malpractice that increases patient harm. the “no blame” model is defined as not accusing a single entity for any healthcare misconduct. It is important for healthcare systems to embody both taking responsibility for healthcare malpractices as well as the “no blame” model to effectively promote patient safety and quality and reduce adverse health events.

Communication-and-resolution programs (CRPs) aim to increase disclosure, learning, and responsibility following adverse medical incidents. The authors of this article identify five obstacles that prevent CRPs from being successful: 1) public policy, 2) compensation for patients following medical errors, 3) application fidelity, 4) evidence of CRPs increasing patient safety, and 5) alignment of CRP methods with patient needs. To increase the success of CRPs, it is recommended that they should be coupled with CRP quality programs. Overall, health institutions are advised to implement these programs into their systems to promote transparency and patient and family engagement.

Journal Article
Published articles related to CRP
CANDOR: The Antidote to Deny and Defend? Richard C. Boothman

This article explains how healthcare providers and insurers were skeptical of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s Communication (AHQR) Communication and Optimal Resolution (CANDOR) toolkit, which is a guide for healthcare providers to use if there was patient injury. Healthcare providers and insurers are weary of the CANDOR toolkit, since it does not quickly fix litigation scandals. This toolkit also does not effectively identify patient safety risks. However, the CANDOR toolkit is an effective step for healthcare providers to take in being honest and transparent with their patients about any malpractice or increased risk of injury.

The “Second Victim Rapid Response Team” was a system created to provide psychological, social, and emotional support for healthcare providers who are known”second victims” in the wake of any adverse health outcome or compromise in patient safety.


Communication and Resolution Programs (CRPs) investigate and and communicate about events not caused by substandard care. CRPs were quite successful in handling such events, but less consistent in offering compensation in cases involving substandard care.

Operating communication and resolution programs (CRPs) where multiple organizations must collaborate can be highly challenging. Success likely requires several preconditions, including preexisting trust among organizations, active leadership engagement, physicians’ commitment to participate, mechanisms for quickly transmitting information to insurers, tolerance for missteps, and clear protocols for joint investigations and resolutions.

The Journal of Patient Safety and Risk Management published study of an “open” hospital system shows that a Collaboration Communication-and-Resolution Program (CRP) cut lawsuits by two-thirds and reduced legal expenses and the time needed to resolve claims. Due to this program’s success, physicians are encouraged to integrate CRPs into their health practices to increase overall patient health quality and safety.


Among patients with chest pain, the implementation of a comprehensive communication-and-resolution program was associated with substantially reduced growth rates in the use of diagnostic testing and imaging services. Further research is needed to establish to what extent these changes were attributable to the program and clinically appropriate.

This study analyzed if a communication-and-resolution program (CRP) was effective in lowering adverse events among patients with chest pain, as well as lowering medical costs. The study concluded that the implementation of the CRP was efficient, since it helped increase the number of chest pain diagnoses as well as significantly reduced associated health costs.

Journal Article
Published articles related to CRP
Choosing Strategies for Change

The rapid rate of change in the world of management continues to escalate. New government regulations, new products, growth, increased competition, technological developments, and an evolving workforce compel organizations to undertake at least moderate change on a regular basis. Yet few major changes are greeted with open arms by employers and employees; they often result in protracted transitions, deadened morale, emotional upheaval, and the costly dedication of managerial time. Kotter and Schlesinger help calm the chaos by identifying four basic reasons why people resist change and offering various methods for overcoming resistance.

Journal Article
Published articles related to CRP
Web resource/Digital Article
General website that contains CRP related information, may be non-specific or general or mixed resources on a website. Article published on-line. Not available as paper version.
Clinician Support: Five Years of Lessons Learned

University of Missouri Health Care (MUHC) deployed an evidence-based emotional support structure for second victims based on research with recovering second victims known as the forYOU Team. It was designed to increase awareness of the second victim phenomenon, “normalize” the psychological and physical impacts, provide real-time surveillance for possible second victims within clinical settings, and render immediate peer-to-peer emotional support when a potential second victim is identified. This article describes the forYOU Team experience.

The Communication and Resolution Program (CRP) Certification program is a promising example of collaboration among institutions, insurers, and regulators to promote patient‐centered accountability and learning following adverse events in the healthcare setting. These programs are successful, because they promote transparency among patients after an adverse health incident, and increase overall health quality.

The study was conducted gain a better understanding about the attitudes and experiences of breast cancer providers regarding communicating with patients about diagnostic error.


  1. Providers more willing to inform patients of a diagnostic error when they felt it would be helpful.
  2. Providers willing to inform patients of diagnostic error when feeling responsible for the error.
  3. Providers willing to inform patients of diagnostic error if less concerned about litigation.
  4. Providers more willing to inform patients of a diagnostic error when the patient asked directly.


In communication-and-resolution programs (CRPs), health systems and liability insurers encourage the disclosure of unanticipated care outcomes to affected patients and proactively seek resolutions, including offering an apology, an explanation, and, where appropriate, reimbursement or compensation. Anecdotal reports from the University of Michigan Health System and other early adopters of CRPs suggest that these programs can substantially reduce liability costs and improve patient safety. In this study, CRP participants were interviewed. They identified several factors that contributed to their programs’ success, including the presence of a strong institutional champion and investing in building and marketing the program to skeptical clinicians.

Journal Article
Published articles related to CRP
Communication-and-resolution programs: The jury is still out

This article explains how communication-and-resolution programs (CRPs) are successful in decreasing litigation fees and compensation that results from patient harm. However, the success of CRPs depends on patient satisfaction, making it necessary for healthcare professionals to focus on factors that increase this. Even though there is little evidence to support the idea that CRPs reduce adverse medical events that result in patient harm, these programs do have the potential to do so.

Journal Article
Published articles related to CRP
Disclosing Adverse Events to Patients: International Norms and Trends

Researchers reviewed patterns in healthcare policies and trends in five countries (the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada) with histories of disclosing adverse incidents to patients. The researchers wanted to analyze the barriers that prevent healthcare providers and institutions from disclosing adverse events to their patients. They concluded that some barriers included difficulties with liability fees, patients’ beliefs on safety in the healthcare setting, and implementing policy changes on a large-scale. Effective ways to combat these challenges include carrying out a long-term program that involves educating patients and healthcare workers about safety.


Journal Article
Published articles related to CRP
CRP resource or tool (e.g. CANDOR)
Disclosure Coaching: An Ask-Tell-Ask Model to Support Clinicians in Disclosure Conversations

Despite the obvious need for open conversations with patients and their families following an adverse event, many organizations still lack the structure to support providers during this difficult time. In many cases, clinicians who have to disclose errors to patients and families fail due to lack of provider education and training, lack of confidence, fears of litigation and emotional distress.

The Ask-Tell-Ask Model focuses on successful disclosure coaching conversations. It includes:

  1. Case Scenario
  2. Key elements
  3. Practical step-by-step strategies for disclosure coaching
  4. Pedagogical model using the “Ask-Tell-Ask” approach
  5. Organizational considerations for establishing a coaching program

This article dissects the meaning of “disclosure-and-resolution” programs, which call health organizations to disclose medical errors to patients and families involved; apologize; and offer compensation when necessary. Health systems that used approach found decreased litigation fees. Researchers analyzed surveys in which individuals used “disclosure-and-resolution programs where appropriate. They found that increasing compensation allowances following an adverse event did not improve results, nor did it decrease the likelihood of patients and families filing lawsuits following an adverse event. Thus, it is important for healthcare systems to remember that “disclosure-and-resolution” programs may help promote effective and honest communication between patients and families, but it does not decrease associated legal costs or the possibility of a lawsuit.

Journal Article
Published articles related to CRP
Effectiveness and efficiency of root cause analysis in medicine

Healthcare providers use root cause analysis to learn from malpractice and decrease the risk of adverse events. This method involves identifying the basic factors that cause performance variability. This model has three parts: 1) what occurred, 2) why did it occur, and 3) what strategies can be used to prevent the event from occurring in the future? This method is effective, because it helps healthcare providers identify the underlying causes of adverse events and take the necessary approaches to combat them.



Communication-and-resolution programs (CRPs) are implemented in hospitals to increase patient safety and effective communication between healthcare providers following patient injury. CRPs act as a guide for hospitals to disclose information to patients after medical injury, ways to efficiently investigate the incident, and how to take accountability for the event and offer compensation when appropriate. In this study, the authors analyzed the effectiveness of CRPs in reducing patient harm four Massachusetts health systems. The authors found that CRP implementation were correlated with decreased litigation fees, but they did not alter any other pertinent outcomes, such as reducing patient harm and increasing transparent communication.



Background Communication-and-resolution programmes (CRP) aim to increase transparency surrounding adverse events, improve patient safety and promote reconciliation by proactively meeting injured patients’ needs. Although early adopters of CRP models reported relatively smooth implementation, other organisations have struggled to achieve the same. However, two Massachusetts hospital systems implementing a CRP demonstrated high fidelity to protocol without raising liability costs.

Study question What factors may account for the Massachusetts hospitals’ ability to implement their CRP successfully?

Setting The CRP was collaboratively designed by two academic medical centres, four of their community hospitals and a multistakeholder coalition.

Data and methods Data were synthesised from (1) key informant interviews around the time of implementation and 2 years later with individuals important to the CRP’s success and (2) notes from 89 teleconferences between hospitals’ CRP implementation teams and study staff to discuss implementation progress. Interview transcripts and teleconference notes were analysed using standard methods of thematic content analysis. A total of 45 individuals participated in interviews (n=24 persons in 38 interviews), teleconferences (n=32) or both (n=11).

Results Participants identified facilitators of the hospitals’ success as: (1) the support of top institutional leaders, (2) heavy investments in educating physicians about the programme, (3) active cultivation of the relationship between hospital risk managers and representatives from the liability insurer, (4) the use of formal decision protocols, (5) effective oversight by full-time project managers, (6) collaborative group implementation, and (7) small institutional size.

Conclusion Although not necessarily causal, several distinctive factors appear to be associated with successful CRP implementation.

Many organizations have struggled to implement CRP models smoothly. The study looks at factors that accounts for the success of two Massachusetts hospital system in implementing a CRP with high conformity to protocol without raising liability costs. Identified factors include: support of top institutional leaders, heavy investments in educating physicians about the programme, active cultivation of the relationship between hospital risk managers.