Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17403753›Full record

ArticleQuality & safety in health care2007

Confidential reporting of patient safety events in primary care: results from a multilevel classification of cognitive and system factors.

Olga Kostopoulou, Brendan Delaney

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality & safety in health care, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Threats to safe transitions from hospital to home: a consensus study in North West London primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Refocusing the lens: patient safety in ambulatory chronic disease care.Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety · 2009
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Olga KostopoulouUniversity of Birmingham, Primary Care Clinical Sciences Building, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK. o.kostopoulou@bham.ac.uk
Brendan Delaney

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo classify events of actual or potential harm to primary care patients using a multilevel taxonomy of cognitive and system factors.

methodsObservational study of patient safety events obtained via a confidential but not anonymous reporting system. Reports were followed up with interviews where necessary. Events were analysed for their causes and contributing factors using causal trees and were classified using the taxonomy. Five general medical practices in the West Midlands were selected to represent a range of sizes and types of patient population. All practice staff were invited to report patient safety events. Main outcome measures were frequencies of clinical types of events reported, cognitive types of error, types of detection and contributing factors; and relationship between types of error, practice size, patient consequences and detection.

results78 reports were relevant to patient safety and analysable. They included 21 (27%) adverse events and 50 (64%) near misses. 16.7% (13/71) had serious patient consequences, including one death. 75.7% (59/78) had the potential for serious patient harm. Most reports referred to administrative errors (25.6%, 20/78). 60% (47/78) of the reports contained sufficient information to characterise cognition: "situation assessment and response selection" was involved in 45% (21/47) of these reports and was often linked to serious potential consequences. The most frequent contributing factor was work organisation, identified in 71 events. This included excessive task demands (47%, 37/71) and fragmentation (28%, 22/71).

conclusionsEven though most reported events were near misses, events with serious patient consequences were also reported. Failures in situation assessment and response selection, a cognitive activity that occurs in both clinical and administrative tasks, was related to serious potential harm.

Indexed as

ConfidentialityChi-Square DistributionClassificationCognitionHumansInterviews as TopicMedical ErrorsObservationPrimary Health CareRisk FactorsSafety ManagementSystems Analysis

Identifiers

PMID17403753
PMCPMC2653163

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.