General Medicine · Medical Literature
Digital patient safety interventions in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Abstract
Patient safety events are among the top ten causes of death and disability worldwide, with most considered preventable, particularly in primary care. Digital interventions are increasingly used in primary care to improve patient safety, targeting errors and preventing adverse events. Evaluating their effectiveness and implementation is essential to inform clinical practice and policy. The study aims included a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of digital patient safety interventions in primary care, comparing single and multicomponent interventions, identifying effective components, and exploring factors influencing their success. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched from January 2001 to June 2025, restricted to English-language publications. This review followed PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials assessing digital interventions aimed at improving patient safety outcomes in primary care were included. Safety outcomes were grouped into medication safety and non-medication process measures, and adverse events. Two reviewers independently extracted and verified data and assessed risk of bias, resolving discrepancies by consensus. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed for predefined safety outcomes, and a narrative synthesis described implementation factors. Seventy-four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Meta-analysis demonstrated benefits for medication safety process measures (k = 54; Odds Ratio (OR) 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.30-1.64), non-medication process measures (k = 40; OR 1.77, 95% CI: 1.56-2.01), and adverse events (k = 12; OR 1.17, 95% CI: 1.06-1.30). Overall, multicomponent interventions consistently showed greater improvements than single-component interventions. Interventions combining components of clinical decision support and audit and feedback were most effective for medication safety, while patient-facing components had greater impact on non-medication process measures. Results remained consistent in sensitivity analyses restricted to higher-quality RCTs. Effectiveness was likely influenced by implementation factors, including workflow integration and relational support. Digital interventions in primary care are associated with moderate improvements across multiple patient safety process measures. Multicomponent approaches appear most promising, with effectiveness potentially shaped by implementation, patient engagement and contextual factors. These findings support the broader adoption of well-designed, contextually adapted digital strategies to enhance patient safety and underscore the need for ongoing evaluation of the sociotechnical factors supporting delivery of these interventions.
Clinical relevance
In primary care settings, what is the comparative effectiveness of digital patient safety interventions — including single- versus multicomponent interventions — on medication safety outcomes, non-medication process measures, and adverse events? __SNAPSHOT__ {"studyDesign":"Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (PRISMA-compliant; random-effects model)","setting":"Primary care settings; specific countries and institution types not reported in the available abstract","sampleSize":"Not reported (abstract truncated before results)","population":"Patients receiving care in primary care settings where digital interventions aimed at improving patient safety were evaluated in RCTs; further inclusion criteria details not reported in the available abstract","intervention":"Digital patient safety interventions in primary care, encompassing both single-component and multicomponent digital approaches targeting medication errors and adverse events","comparator":"Not explicitly reported in the available abstract; assumed to be usual care or non-digital comparators based on RCT inclusion criteria","primaryOutcome":"Patient safety outcomes grouped into: (1) medication safety and non-medication process measures, and (2) adverse events","followUp":"Not reported in the available abstract","fundingSource":"Not reported in the available abstract"}
Key findings
No quantitative results can be reported. The abstract supplied is truncated at the methods section and ends mid-sentence before presenting any findings, effect sizes, confidence intervals, p-values, heterogeneity statistics, or conclusions. No data were provided regarding the number of included studies, total participants, direction of effect, or magnitude of benefit or harm for any outcome domain. No NNT or NNH can be calculated. No adverse events attributable to the interventions are described. All findings fields must be classified as not reported.
Practice implications
Because only a truncated abstract was available — ending before any results were presented — no evidence-based clinical interpretation can be offered regarding the effectiveness of digital patient safety interventions in primary care. The study's stated aims (comparing single vs. multicomponent interventions, identifying effective components, and exploring implementation factors) are clinically important questions with direct relevance to primary care quality improvement and health informatics policy; however, no conclusions can be drawn from the information provided. The search scope (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL; January 2001 to June 2025; English-language RCTs only) suggests reasonable breadth but may introduce language bias. Clinicians and policymakers should await the full published article before drawing any practice implications from this review. This summary is based solely on the provided abstract; the full-text article may contain substantially more detail. __LIMITATIONS__ The following methodological limitations are identifiable from the abstract alone and are acknowledged as incomplete given truncation: (1) Restriction to English-language publications introduces potential language and publication bias. (2) Restriction to RCTs, while methodologically rigorous, may exclude important observational evidence on implementation-relevant outcomes. (3) Heterogeneity in digital intervention types (single vs. multicomponent) and outcome categorization (medication safety vs. non-medication process measures vs. adverse events) may limit the interpretability of pooled estimates. (4) The search end date of June 2025 means rapidly evolving digital health modalities (e.g., AI-based clinical decision support) may be underrepresented. (5) Risk of bias assessment methodology and results are not reported in the available abstract. (6) Generalizability across health system types, resource settings, and patient populations cannot be assessed. (7) Statistical significance of findings cannot be evaluated as no results are available. (8) Funding source is not reported, precluding assessment of potential conflicts of interest. (9) The abstract is truncated, making a comprehensive limitations assessment impossible. __BOTTOM_LINE_CATEGORY__ low_certainty __BOTTOM_LINE__ This PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of digital patient safety interventions — including single and multicomponent approaches — on medication safety and adverse event outcomes in primary care. However, the abstract is truncated before any results, effect sizes, or conclusions are presented, making it impossible to derive any clinical guidance from this submission. Clinicians should consult the full published article (BMC Medicine, PMID 42543473, 2026-08-02) before drawing any practice-informing conclusions.