Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29602858›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2018

Incidence of adverse events in Sweden during 2013-2016: a cohort study describing the implementation of a national trigger tool.

Lena Nilsson, Madeleine Borgstedt-Risberg, Michael Soop, Urban Nylén, Carina Ålenius, Hans Rutberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

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

  1. Predictive values of trigger tools for identifying adverse events in hospitalized patients using a medical record review: a systematic review.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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.

Lena NilssonDepartment of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Madeleine Borgstedt-RisbergCentre for Organisational Support and Development (CVU), Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Michael SoopNational Board of Health and Welfare, Stockholm, Sweden.
Urban NylénNational Board of Health and Welfare, Stockholm, Sweden.
Carina ÅleniusSwedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions, Stockholm, Sweden.
Hans RutbergSwedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe the implementation of a trigger tool in Sweden and present the national incidence of adverse events (AEs) over a 4-year period during which an ongoing national patient safety initiative was terminated.

designCohort study using retrospective record review based on a trigger tool methodology. SETTING AND

participantsPatients ≥18 years admitted to all somatic acute care hospitals in Sweden from 2013 to 2016 were randomised into the study. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was the incidence of AEs, and secondary measures were type of injury, severity of harm, preventability of AEs, estimated healthcare cost of AEs and incidence of AEs in patients cared for in another type of unit than the one specialised for their medical needs ('off-site').

resultsIn a review of 64 917 admissions, the average AE rates in 2014 (11.6%), 2015 (10.9%) and 2016 (11.4%) were significantly lower than in 2013 (13.1%). The decrease in the AE rates was seen in different age groups, in both genders and for preventable and non-preventable AEs. The decrease comprised only the least severe AEs. The types of AEs that decreased were hospital-acquired infections, urinary bladder distention and compromised vital signs. Patients cared for 'off-site' had 84% more preventable AEs than patients cared for in the appropriate units. The cost of increased length of stay associated with preventable AEs corresponded to 13%-14% of the total cost of somatic hospital care in Sweden.

conclusionsThe rate of AEs in Swedish somatic hospitals has decreased from 2013 to 2016. Retrospective record review can be used to monitor patient safety over time, to assess the effects of national patient safety interventions and analyse challenges to patient safety such as the increasing care of patients 'off-site'. It was found that the economic burden of preventable AEs is high.

Indexed as

Medical ErrorsPatient SafetyQuality Indicators, Health CareAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMedical RecordsMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSafety Managementadverse eventpatient harmpatient safetytrigger tool

Identifiers

PMID29602858
PMCPMC5884347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.