ArticleBMJ open2018
Incidence of adverse events in Sweden during 2013-2016: a cohort study describing the implementation of a national trigger tool.
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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- 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 · 2025Pooled it
- Variation in detected adverse events using trigger tools: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- National and Institutional Trends in Adverse Events Over Time: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Longitudinal Retrospective Patient Record Review Studies.Journal of patient safety · 2021Pooled it
- Prevalence, severity, and nature of preventable patient harm across medical care settings: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Pooled it
- The influence of adverse events on inpatient outcomes in a tertiary hospital using a diagnosis-related group database.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- The Korea National Patient Safety Incidents Inquiry Survey: Feasibility of Medical Record Review for Detecting Adverse Events in Regional Public Hospitals.Journal of patient safety · 2022Review
- Effect of Patient Safety Training Program of Nurses in Operating Room.Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing · 2022Article
- Using the Global Trigger Tool in surgical and neurosurgical patients: A feasibility study.PloS one · 2022Article
- The Irish National Adverse Event Study-2 (INAES-2): longitudinal trends in adverse event rates in the Irish healthcare system.BMJ quality & safety · 2021Article
- Applying the Global Trigger Tool in German Hospitals: A Pilot in Surgery and Neurosurgery.Journal of patient safety · 2020Article
- Identifying no-harm incidents in home healthcare: a cohort study using trigger tool methodology.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Adverse events in psychiatry: a national cohort study in Sweden with a unique psychiatric trigger tool.BMC psychiatry · 2020Article
- Patient-related factors associated with an increased risk of being a reported case of preventable harm in first-line health care: a case-control study.BMC family practice · 2020Article
- Diagnostic errors reported in primary healthcare and emergency departments: A retrospective and descriptive cohort study of 4830 reported cases of preventable harm in Sweden.The European journal of general practice · 2019Article
- Assessing the development and implementation of the Global Trigger Tool method across a large health system in Sicily.F1000Research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.