Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30235764›Full record

ArticleMedicine2018

Effectiveness and limitations of an incident-reporting system analyzed by local clinical safety leaders in a tertiary hospital: Prospective evaluation through real-time observations of patient safety incidents.

Elena Ramírez, Alberto Martín, Yuri Villán, Miguel Lorente, Jonay Ojeda, Marta Moro, Carmen Vara, Miguel Avenza, María J Domingo, Pablo Alonso and 6 more

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

16 authors.

Elena RamírezFunctional Risk Management Unit Department of Clinical Pharmacology, School of Medicine, Autonomous University of Madrid Department of Management Control Quality Medical Unit Computing Department Department of Hospital Pharmacy Quality Nurse Unit Physiotherapy, Rehabilitation Department Nurse Management Department of Neurology Department of Intensive Medicine Department of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital La Paz-Cantoblanco-Carlos III, IdiPAZ, Madrid, Spain.
Alberto Martín
Yuri Villán
Miguel Lorente
Jonay Ojeda
Marta Moro
Carmen Vara
Miguel Avenza
María J Domingo
Pablo Alonso
María J Asensio
José A Blázquez
Rafael Hernández
Jesús Frías
Ana Frank
SINOIRES Working Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The effectiveness of a hospital incident-reporting system (IRS) on improve patient safety is unclear. This study objective was to assess which implemented improvement actions after the analysis of the incidents reported were effective in reduce near-misses or adverse events.Patient safety incidents (PSIs), near misses and adverse events, notified to the IRS were analyzed by local clinical safety leaders (CSLs) who propose and implement improvement actions. The local CSLs received training workshops in patient safety and analysis tools. Following the notification of a PSI in the IRS, prospective real-time observations with external staff were planned to record and rated the frequency of that PSI. This methodology was repeated after the implementation of the improvement actions.Ultimately, 1983 PSIs were identified. Surgery theaters, emergency departments, intensive care units, and general adult care units comprised 82% of all PSIs. The PSI rate increased from 0.39 to 3.4 per 1000 stays in 42 months. A significant correlation was found between the reporting rate per month and the number of workshop-trained local CSLs (Spearman coefficient = 0.874; P = .003). A total of 24,836 real-time observations showed a statistically significant reduction in PSIs observed in 63.15% (categories: medication P = .044; communication P = .037; technology P = .009) of the implemented improvements actions, but not in the organization category (P = .094). In the multivariate analyses, the following factors were associated with the reduction in near misses or adverse events after the implementation of the improvement actions: "adverse event" type of PSI (odds ratio [OR], 3.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.93-5.74), "disussion group" type of analysis (OR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.52-3.76), and root cause type of analysis (OR, 2.32; 95% CI: 1.17-3.90).The implementation of a hospital IRS, together with the systematization of the method and analysis of PSIs by workshop-trained local CSLs led to an important reduction in the frequency of PSIs.

Indexed as

Patient SafetyHealth Plan ImplementationHumansNear Miss, HealthcareProspective StudiesRisk ManagementSafety ManagementTertiary Care Centers

Identifiers

PMID30235764
PMCPMC6160204

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.