Which outcome is expected from a well-run M&M conference?

Which outcome is expected from a well-run M&M conference?

• A. Publicizing all cases to external audiences.
• B. Assigning blame to clinicians involved.
• C. Reviewing adverse outcomes, discussing clinical learnings, and developing action plans to reduce recurrence.
• D. Replacing formal incident reporting with M&M discussions.

Answer: (C)

A well-run M&M conference aims to turn adverse outcomes into learning and system improvement rather than assigning blame. In practice, cases are reviewed to understand what happened, what can be learned, and what concrete actions will reduce the chance of recurrence. This is best done in a non-punitive, multidisciplinary setting that focuses on how systems, processes, and teamwork contributed to the outcome, so changes can be made—such as updated protocols, better checklists, improved communication, or targeted training.

Publicizing cases to external audiences isn’t appropriate because M&M is typically confidential and meant for internal learning and teaching. Assigning blame contradicts the safety culture that encourages open discussion of system factors. Replacing formal incident reporting with M&M discussions isn’t right either, since incident reporting remains an essential mechanism for documenting and tracking safety events; M&M uses those insights to drive improvement rather than supplanting official reporting.