ArticleGlobal journal of health science2015
Assessment of Clinical Risk Management System in Hospitals: An Approach for Quality Improvement.
Article in Global journal of health science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The digitization process and the evolution of Clinical Risk Management concept: The role of Clinical Engineering in the operational management of biomedical technologies.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Use of Standardized and Non-Standardized Tools for Measuring the Risk of Falls and Independence in Clinical Practice.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- The long way ahead to achieve an effective patient safety culture: challenges perceived by nurses.BMC health services research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical risks have created major problems in healthcare system such as serious adverse effects on patient safety and enhancing the financial burden for the healthcare. Thus, clinical risk management (CRM) system has been introduced for improving the quality and safety of services to health care. The aim of this study was to assess the status of CRM in the hospitals.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted on 200 nursing staff from three teaching hospitals affiliated with the Kerman University of Medical Sciences in southeast of Iran. Data were collected from the participants using questionnaire and observational checklist in quality improvement offices and selected wards. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 20.
resultsAlmost, 57% of persons participated in at least one of training sessions on CRM. The status of CRM system was rated from weak to moderate (2.93±0.72- 3.18±0.66). Among the six domains of CRM system, the highest mean belonged to domain the monitoring of analysis, evaluation and risk control (3.18±0.72); the lowest mean belonged to domain the staff's knowledge, recognition and understanding of CRM (2.93±0.66). There were no integrated electronic systems for recording and analyzing clinical risks and incidents in the hospitals.
conclusionAttempts have been made to establish CRM through improvement quality approach such as clinical governance and accreditation, but not enough, however, health care should move toward quality improvement and safe practice through the effective integration of CRM in organizational process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.