Asheville – On March 10, the Emergency Care Research Institute (ECRI) released its list of “Top 10 Patient Safety Concerns 2025.” Anticipated items, such as an avalanche of staff shortages leading to professional burnout, distractions from excessive insurance paperwork, infections, and language barriers, did not make the cut.
Item nominations were made by subject matter experts from ECRI and its affiliate, the Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP). Nominators had to defend their choices based on the frequency of mentions in credible sources like medical journals, conference proceedings, equipment recalls, and incident reports. Members of the public who read the 2024 report were also invited to provide “people’s choice” input. An interdisciplinary team of experts served as judges.
Topping this year’s list was “risks of dismissing patient, family, and caregiver concerns.” Granted, doctors didn’t spend a decade burning the candle at both ends in medical school and then enter practice serving long, exhausting hours making life-and-death decisions just to take schooling from consumers of sales pitches from celebrity “doctors.”
Still, while doctors have broad-based experiences from years of treating thousands of patients and access to various information beyond Dr. Google’s paywalls, individuals living with their pains and maladies possess “peculiar knowledge” that a doctor might miss during a 16-minute, point-in-time annual visit—unless the patient has the gumption to speak up.
ECRI is not asserting that “the customer is always right” but rather calling for better dialogue. Their paper suggests that instead of diagnosing dissenting patients with a mental illness, doctors should share facts and, when necessary, assist with healthcare literacy. According to ECRI, “One study found that more than 40% of female participants avoided medical care because of previous experiences of medical gaslighting.”
In third place was a related item: “the wide availability and viral spread of medical misinformation.” Social media is rife with unsubstantiated and sometimes lethal nonsense, including persuading individuals to ignore doctors because they’re owned by Big Pharma. “Some health influencers exploit this trend for their own financial gain, such as accepting payment from companies, particularly in the diet and nutrition industries, to promote unproven or unsafe treatments to their social media followers.”
The dystopian-sounding “insufficient governance of artificial intelligence in healthcare” earned second place. AI is still a fledgling technology. It has been kicked out of the nest but still requires parental surveillance. This item is not an SOS to rein in a Frankenstein monster but a call for establishing policies and protocols, which, unfortunately, will only take more time away from medical staff who could be spending it with patients, observing and problem-solving.
Number four, “medical error and delay in care resulting from cybersecurity breaches,” encompasses much more than hackers collecting information they cannot use. Hackers can install ransomware and delete data such as medical histories and medication lists of inpatients. They can even disrupt the operation of medical equipment.
ECRI reported that 88% of surveyed healthcare cybersecurity professionals had been attacked last year. The average number of attacks per organization was 40. In 2003, 725 large breaches affected over 133 million medical records. In the first half of 2024, the average cost per healthcare breach in the United States was $9.77 million.
It is too early for hospitals to develop responsible responses to ECRI’s latest findings. For now, they are dealing with more conventional concerns like those on ECRI’s “Ongoing Patient Safety Challenges” list.
Mission Hospital has historically prided itself on its Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grades. Most recently, it received a B. The hospital scored well in terms of patient health outcomes but received poor grades for communication. It earned the worst grade for nursing and bedside care and scored below average in communications with doctors and nurses as well as responsiveness of hospital staff. This is the second B among four A’s in the hospital’s most recent semiannual grades.
Most noticeable on Advent’s scorecard was the absence of data on MRSA, blood infections, and deaths from serious treatable complications. This hospital only performed worse than average in its number of colon surgery infections. Due to excellent communication, Advent maintained straight A’s for the last six grading periods.
Pardee also scored an A. Like Mission, it has received two B’s and four A’s in Leapfrog’s most recent reports. This time, Pardee only scored below average in deaths from serious treatable complications, harmful events, and dangerous bedsores.