ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2026
Patient safety practices in an innovative digital landscape: an interview study on triage in Swedish digital primary care.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith rapid technological development and new triage systems in primary healthcare, care complexity is increasing, reshaping the landscape of patient safety. Despite their growing integration, little is known about how healthcare professionals safeguard patient safety during triage. Therefore, this study aimed to explore how healthcare professionals manage patient safety during the triage process in digital primary care.
methodAn inductive and explorative research design was employed, using qualitative content analysis to analyse interviews with ten participants. The participants were healthcare professionals experienced with various triage systems.
resultsThree themes were identified: acting as a fine-tuned instrument to avoid mistriage, resolving technical interruptions to prevent triage delays, and mitigating organisational disruptions to ensure adequate assessment. These themes reflected the participants' continuous problem-solving efforts to maintain patient safety throughout the triage process.
conclusionThe findings suggest that triage systems may be overly simplified, shifting greater responsibility to healthcare professionals, who must interpret system outputs and manage the broader complexities of primary care triage. We argue that triage safety emerges from the interaction between an understanding of the healthcare system's contextual capacity, broad medical knowledge, and the interpersonal skills needed to recognise and respond to each patient's unique situation. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Clinically, it is essential to define in advance the boundaries and procedures of the triage process, the mode of digital integration, and the system's intended purpose. Specifying these elements helps ensure that the digital tool supports rather than complicates clinical work and helps establish the preconditions necessary for patient safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.