Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21143949›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2010

Patient safety in out-of-hours primary care: a review of patient records.

Marleen Smits, Linda Huibers, Brian Kerssemeijer, Eimert de Feijter, Michel Wensing, Paul Giesen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Characterising patient complaints in out-of-hours general practice: a retrospective cohort study in Ireland.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Safety of telephone triage in out-of-hours care: a systematic review.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2011
    Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

6 authors.

Marleen SmitsScientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, the Netherlands.
Linda Huibers
Brian Kerssemeijer
Eimert de Feijter
Michel Wensing
Paul Giesen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost patients receive healthcare in primary care settings, but relatively little is known about patient safety. Out-of-hours contacts are of particular importance to patient safety. Our aim was to examine the incidence, types, causes, and consequences of patient safety incidents at general practice cooperatives for out-of-hours primary care and to examine which factors were associated with the occurrence of patient safety incidents.

methodsA retrospective study of 1,145 medical records concerning patient contacts with four general practice cooperatives. Reviewers identified records with evidence of a potential patient safety incident; a physician panel determined whether a patient safety incident had indeed occurred. In addition, the panel determined the type, causes, and consequences of the incidents. Factors associated with incidents were examined in a random coefficient logistic regression analysis.

resultsIn 1,145 patient records, 27 patient safety incidents were identified, an incident rate of 2.4% (95% CI: 1.5% to 3.2%). The most frequent incident type was treatment (56%). All incidents had at least partly been caused by failures in clinical reasoning. The majority of incidents did not result in patient harm (70%). Eight incidents had consequences for the patient, such as additional interventions or hospitalisation. The panel assessed that most incidents were unlikely to result in patient harm in the long term (89%). Logistic regression analysis showed that age was significantly related to incident occurrence: the likelihood of an incident increased with 1.03 for each year increase in age (95% CI: 1.01 to 1.04).

conclusionPatient safety incidents occur in out-of-hours primary care, but most do not result in harm to patients. As clinical reasoning played an important part in these incidents, a better understanding of clinical reasoning and guideline adherence at GP cooperatives could contribute to patient safety.

Indexed as

Outcome and Process Assessment, Health CareSafety ManagementAfter-Hours CareCase ManagementClinical AuditClinical CompetenceFamily PracticeFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMedical ErrorsMedical RecordsNetherlandsPhysician-Patient Relations

Identifiers

PMID21143949
PMCPMC3016358

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.