The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
PERSPECTIVE article
Front. Health Serv.
Sec. Patient Safety
Volume 5 - 2025 |
doi: 10.3389/frhs.2025.1513670
This article is part of the Research Topic Responding to Harm with Compassion, Accountability and Transparency View all 3 articles
The Power and Pain of Words: How Language Matters in Responding to Patients after Harm Authors: EM Benjamin (1,2), A Peterson (3), L Schweitzer (4), S Calcasola (5), F Korn (6), P Lodato (7), J Bradley (6, 8), and C Hemmelgarn (9)
Provisionally accepted
Evan M Benjamin 1,2*
Austin Peterson 3 Leilani Schweitzer 4 Stephanie Calcasola 5
Frank E Korn 6
Peter Lodato 7
Joel Bradley 6,8
Carole Hemmelgarn 9- 1 Ariadne Labs, Boston, United States
- 2 School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
- 3 Commonspirit Health, Chicago, Illinois, United States
- 4 Consultant in patient safety, Reno NV, United States
- 5 Hartford HealthCare, Hartford, Connecticut, United States
- 6 Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, United States
- 7 Christiana Care Health System, Wilmington, Delaware, United States
- 8 Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, United States
- 9 Patients for Patient Safety US, Atlanta GA, United States
A change is slowly occurring in the ways healthcare responds to patients after they experience harm. The imperative to be transparent with patients and families has been accepted as a key element of high quality, safe and patient-centered healthcare. The language used to describe the experience of the people impacted by harm events is also evolving, recognizing that certain words can help or hinder the experience of patients affected by harm. The language describing these efforts is shifting from legal and institutional terminology to more inclusive terms recognizing broader groups impacted by harm. We describe the evolution of language regarding harm response and make recommendations for the future of the field. While our observations on language are specific to the terminology used in the United States, the concept of moving to more patient-centered language is universal. Other countries should make similar reviews to use more patient-centered language when discussing patient harm.
Keywords: Patient Safety, Transparency, disclosure & transparency, Reconciliation, harm
Received: 18 Oct 2024; Accepted: 29 Jan 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Benjamin, Peterson, Schweitzer, Calcasola, Korn, Lodato, Bradley and Hemmelgarn. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Evan M Benjamin, Ariadne Labs, Boston, United States
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.