Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32581410›Full record

ArticleNagoya journal of medical science2020

Intervention efficacy for eliminating patient misidentification using step-by-step problem-solving procedures to improve patient safety.

Tatsuya Fukami, Masakazu Uemura, Mineko Terai, Tomomi Umemura, Mika Maeda, Mayumi Ichikawa, Naoko Sawai, Fumimasa Kitano, Yoshimasa Nagao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nagoya journal of medical science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Implementation of Health Information Systems to Improve Patient Identification.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

9 authors.

Tatsuya FukamiDepartment of Patient Safety, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.
Masakazu UemuraDepartment of Patient Safety, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.
Mineko TeraiDepartment of Patient Safety, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.
Tomomi UmemuraDepartment of Patient Safety, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.
Mika MaedaDepartment of Patient Safety, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.
Mayumi IchikawaDepartment of Patient Safety, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.
Naoko SawaiDepartment of Patient Safety, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.
Fumimasa KitanoDepartment of Patient Safety, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.
Yoshimasa NagaoDepartment of Patient Safety, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of interventions to reduce patient misidentification incidents classified as level 2 and over (adverse events occurred for patients) with the step-by-step problem-solving method. All incidents related to patient misidentification were selected, and relevant information was collected from the original electronic incident reports. We then conducted an eight-step problem-solving process with the aim of reducing patient misclassification and improving patient safety. Step 1: the number of misidentification-related incident reports and the percentage of these reports in the total incident reports increased each year. Step 2: the most frequent misidentification type was sample collection tubes, followed by drug administration and hospital meals. Step 3: we set a target of an 20% decrease in patient misidentification cases classified as level 2 or over compared with the previous year, and established this as a hospital priority. Step 4: we found that discrepancies in patient identification procedures were the most important causes of misidentification. Step 5: we standardized the patient identification process to achieve an 10% reduction in misidentification. Step 6: we disseminated instructional videos to all staff members. Step 7: we confirmed there was an 18% reduction in level 2 and over patient misidentification compared with the previous year. Step 8: we intend to make additional effort to decrease misidentification of patients by a further 10%. Level 2 and over patient misidentification can be reduced by a patient identification policy using a step-by-step problem-solving procedure. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of interventions to reduce patient misidentification incidents with step-by-step problem-solving method. Continued seamless efforts to eliminate patient misidentification are mandatory for this activity.

Indexed as

Hospitals, UniversityPatient Identification SystemsPatient SafetyHumansJapanMedical ErrorsProblem SolvingReference StandardsRisk ManagementRoot Cause Analysispatient misidentificationpatient safetyproblem-solving process

Identifiers

PMID32581410
PMCPMC7276410

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.