OBJECTIVE: To explore how patients with hospital experience construct patient safety, from the identification of a patient safety risk to the decision to file a complaint.
BACKGROUND: Patients play an important role in the prevention of adverse events in hospitals, but the ability of patients to act and influence their own safety is still challenged by multiple factors. Understanding how patients perceive risk and act to prevent harm may shed light on how to enhance patients\' opportunities to participate in patient safety.
METHODS: The research design of this study is qualitative and exploratory.
METHODS: Twelve participants who had experienced Swedish hospital care were interviewed between June 2022 and July 2023. The method of analysis was constructivist grounded theory, focusing on social processes. The COREQ checklist for qualitative research was followed.
RESULTS: Four categories were constructed: (1) defining the boundary between one\'s own capacity and that of the hospital, (2) acting to minimize the impact on one\'s safety, (3) finding oneself in the hands of healthcare professionals and (4) exploring the boundaries between normality and abnormality of the situation. This process was captured in the core category of navigating the path of least suffering. This illustrated how the participants constructed meaning about patient safety risks and showed that they prevented multiple adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: Provided that participants were able to act independently, they avoided a multitude of adverse events. When they were dependent on healthcare professionals, their safety became more vulnerable. Failure to respond to the participants\' concerns could lead to long-term suffering.
CONCLUSIONS: By responding immediately to patients\' concerns about their safety, healthcare professionals can help prevent avoidable suffering and exhaustive searching for someone in the healthcare system who will take their needs seriously.
UNASSIGNED: A member check was performed with the help of one of the participants who read the findings to confirm familiarity.

Adverse events and medical harm comprise major health concerns for people all over the world, including Thailand. The prevalence and burden of medical harm must always be monitored, and a voluntary database should not be used to represent national value. The purpose of this study is to estimate the national prevalence and economic impact of medical harm in Thailand using routine administrative data from the inpatient department electronic claim database under the Universal Coverage scheme from 2016 to 2020. Our findings show that there are approximately 400,000 visits with potentially unsafe medical care per year (or 7% of all inpatient visits under the Universal Coverage scheme). The annual cost of medical harm is estimated to be approximately USD 278 million (approximately THB 9.6 billion), with an average of 3.5 million bed-days per year. This evidence can be used to raise safety awareness and support medical harm prevention policies. Future work should focus on improving medical harm surveillance using better data quality and more comprehensive data on medical harm.

Healthcare professionals have a major responsibility to protect patients from harm. Despite vast efforts to decrease the number of adverse events, the progression of patient safety has internationally been acknowledged as slow. From a social construction perspective, it has been argued that the understanding of patient safety is contextual based on historical and structural rules, and that this meaning construction points out different directions of possible patient safety actions. By focusing on fact construction and its productive and limiting effect on how something can be understood, we explored the discourses about healthcare professionals in 29 written reports of adverse events as reported by patients, relatives, and healthcare professionals. Through the analysis, a discourse about the healthcare professionals as experts was found. The expert role most dominantly included an understanding that adverse events were identified through physical signs and that patient safety could be prevented by more strictly following routines and work procedures. We drew upon the conclusion that these regimes of truth brought power to the expert discourse, to the point that it became difficult for patients and relatives to engage in patient safety actions on their terms.

Adverse health care events are a global public health issue despite major efforts, and they have been acknowledged as a complex concern. The aim of this study was to explore the construction of unsafe care using accounts of adverse events concerning the patient, as reported by patients, relatives, and health care professionals. Twenty-nine adverse events reported in an acute care setting in a Swedish university hospital were analyzed through discourse analysis, where the construction of what was considered to be real and true in the descriptions of unsafe care was analyzed. In the written reports about unsafe events, the patient was spoken of in three different ways: (a) the patient as a presentation of physical signs, (b) the patient as suffering and vulnerable, and (c) the patient as unpredictable. When the patient\'s voice was subordinate to physical signs, this was described as being something that conflicted with patient safety. The conclusion was that the patient\'s voice might be the only sign available in the early stages of adverse events. Therefore, it is crucial for health care professionals to give importance to the patient\'s voice to prevent patients from harm and not unilaterally act only upon abnormal physical signs.