Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31234858›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

Deployment of Critical Incident Reporting System (CIRS) in public Styrian hospitals: a five year perspective.

Gerald Sendlhofer, Peter Schweppe, Ursula Sprincnik, Veronika Gombotz, Karina Leitgeb, Peter Tiefenbacher, Lars-Peter Kamolz, Gernot Brunner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Let us talk about mistakes.Pediatric radiology · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors.

Gerald SendlhoferResearch Unit for Safety in Health, c/o Division of Plastic, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria. gerald.sendlhofer@klinikum-graz.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6538-3116
Peter SchweppeDepartment for Law and Risk Management, Styrian Hospitals Limited Liability Company (KAGes), Graz, Austria.
Ursula SprincnikDepartment for Law and Risk Management, Styrian Hospitals Limited Liability Company (KAGes), Graz, Austria.
Veronika GombotzExecutive Department for Quality and Risk Management, University Hospital Graz, Graz, Austria.
Karina LeitgebExecutive Department for Quality and Risk Management, University Hospital Graz, Graz, Austria.
Peter TiefenbacherExecutive Department for Quality and Risk Management, University Hospital Graz, Graz, Austria.
Lars-Peter KamolzResearch Unit for Safety in Health, c/o Division of Plastic, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Gernot BrunnerResearch Unit for Safety in Health, c/o Division of Plastic, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo increase patient safety, so-called Critical Incident Reporting Systems (CIRS) were implemented. For Austria, no data are available on how CIRS is used within a healthcare facility. Therefore, the aim of this study was to present the development of CIRS within one of the biggest hospital providers in Austria.

methodsIn the province of Styria, CIRS was introduced in 2012 within KAGes (holder of public hospitals) in 22 regional hospitals and one tertiary university hospital. CIRS is available in all of these hospitals using the same software solution. For reporting a CIRS case an overall guideline exists.

resultsAs of 2013, 2.504 CIRS cases were reported. Predominantly, CIRS-cases derived from surgical and associated disciplines (ranging from 35 to 45%). According to the list of hazards (also called "risk atlas"), errors in patient identification (ranging from 7 to 12%), errors in management of medicinal products (ranging from < 5 to 9%), errors in management of medical devices (ranging from < 5 to 10%) and errors in communication (ranging from < 5 to 6%) occurred most frequently. Most often, a CIRS case was reported due to individual error-related reasons (48%), followed by errors caused by organization, team factors, communication or documentation failures (34%).

conclusionsIn summary, CIRS has been used for 5 years and 2.504 CIRS-cases were reported. There is a steady increase of reported CIRS cases per year. It became also obvious that disregarding guidelines or standards are a very common reason for reporting a CIRS case. CIRS can be regarded as a helpful supportive tool in clinical risk management and supports organizational learning and thereby collective knowledge management.

Indexed as

AustriaCommunicationHospitals, PublicHumansMedical ErrorsPatient SafetyRisk ManagementCritical incidentIncident reportingPatient safetySafety

Identifiers

PMID31234858
PMCPMC6591923

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.