The use of abbreviations is a common practice in almost all disciplines globally. Abbreviations are simply shorter versions of the words which are commonly used in the field. The abbreviations are commonly agreed upon among the players in the disciplines. This means that officers can effectively communicate using abbreviations while at the same time alienating those outside the field. In some fields, the use of these abbreviations is incorporated during the training period especially at institutions of higher learning. The abbreviations amount to codes common among people within a certain field but unique to the field. Consequently, what is applicable to lawyers is completely different from what engineers use and also different from what is applicable to the medical field. This paper explores the use of abbreviations in the healthcare field and how this interferes with the communication process among different players in the sector, the possible resultant errors, and possible remedies. It also looks at the effectiveness of eliminating abbreviations in error reduction, suggests policies applicable to ensure effective use of abbreviations, and looks at the measures already taken to reduce errors. Eliminating abbreviations The healthcare field is a very sensitive field mainly because it deals directly with the restoration of health to people. Unfortunately, the field is crowded with different professionals who must work together to ensure success in health restoration. They range from emergency caregivers, nurses, doctors, surgeons, X-ray technicians, laboratory technicians, and pharmacists. Communication between these professionals is not only voluminous but also prone to errors that cause or significantly increase the probability of death for the patient hence negating all the benefits of having the system. Estimates show that over 80% of fatal errors in the medical field result from poor communication among caregivers (Cohen, p740). The use of abbreviations has been cited as the most important cause of miscommunication. Despite the efforts into in ensuring that all caregivers are conversant with the abbreviations, errors still do occur. Some players in the field have recommended that the abbreviations be eliminated in order to reduce the occurrence of such errors. In the year 2004, the Joint Commission developed a “do not use list” of abbreviations. The list contained numerous abbreviations which were identified as causing miscommunication among caregivers. These were identified after a threthree-yearvey of communication in medical institutions. Clearly, the most important gain from such action is the clarity of reports. When abbreviations are eliminated and replaced by the full version, there’s much less likelihood of misinterpretation. Therefore in a case where a laboratory technician has avoided the use of abbreviations, there are fewer chances of the doctor misinterpreting the lab results hence a minimal chance of misdiagnosis. According to the research conducted by the joint commission, the errors resulting from abbreviations were mainly a result of differing handwriting which made it possible for caregivers to confuse letters and hence the message. Eliminating usethe of abbreviations conclusively deals with this problem (Institute for Safe Medication Practices, par5). Written policies on the abbreviation As earlier mentioned, the field of healthcare is overly sensitive owing to the fact that it deals directly