Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33213455›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

Incident reports involving hospital administrative staff: analysis of data from the Japan Council for Quality Health care nationwide database.

Naomi Akiyama, Tomoya Akiyama, Kenshi Hayashida, Takeru Shiroiwa, Keisuke Koeda

Open access · goldAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Naomi AkiyamaIwate Medical University, 2-1-1 Idaidori, Yahabacho, Shiwagun, Iwate, 028-3695, Japan. nakiyama@iwate-med.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6365-9310
Tomoya AkiyamaIwate Medical University, 2-1-1 Idaidori, Yahabacho, Shiwagun, Iwate, 028-3695, Japan.
Kenshi HayashidaDepartment of Medical Informatics and Management, University Hospital, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Takeru ShiroiwaNational Institute of Public Health (NIPH) Center for Outcomes Research and Economic Evaluation for Health (C2H), Wako, Japan.
Keisuke KoedaIwate Medical University, 2-1-1 Idaidori, Yahabacho, Shiwagun, Iwate, 028-3695, Japan.
Iwate Medical University · JPNational Institute of Public Health · JPUniversity of Occupational and Environmental Health Japan · JP

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JP 20K18889
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTask shifting and task sharing in health care are rapidly becoming more common as the shortage of physicians increases. However, research has not yet examined the changing roles of hospital administrative staff. This study clarified: (1) the adverse incidents caused by hospital administrative staff, and the direct and indirect impact of these incidents on patient care; and (2) the incidents that directly involved hospital administrative staff.

methodsThis study used case report data from the Japan Council for Quality Health care collected from April 1, 2010 to March 31, 2019, including a total of 30,823 reports. In April 2020, only the 88 self-reported incidents by hospital administrative staff were downloaded, excluding incidents reported by those in medical and co-medical occupations. Data from three reports implicating pharmacists were rejected and the quantitative and textual data from the remaining 85 case reports were analyzed in terms of whether they impacted patient care directly or indirectly.

resultsThirty-nine reports (45.9%) involved direct impact on patient care, while 46 (54.1%) involved indirect impact on patient care. Most incidents that directly impacted patient care involved administrative staff writing prescriptions on behalf of a doctor (n = 24, 61.5%); followed by errors related to system administration, information, and documentation (n = 7, 17.9%). Most reported errors that indirectly affected patient care were related to system administration, information, and documentation used by administrative staff (n = 22, 47.8%), or to reception (n = 9, 19.6%). Almost all errors occurred during weekdays. Most frequent incidents involved outpatients (n = 23, 27.1%), or occurred next to examination/operation rooms (n = 12, 14.1%). Further, a total of 14 cases (16.5%) involved patient misidentification.

conclusionsIncidents involving hospital administrative staff, the most common of which are medication errors from incorrect prescriptions, can lead to severe consequences for patients. Given that administrative staff now form a part of medical treatment teams, improvements in patient care may require further submission and review of incident reports involving administrative staff.

Indexed as

Quality of Health CareRisk ManagementDelivery of Health CareHospitalsHumansJapanHospital administrative staffIncidentsMedication errorPatient safetyQuality improvementRisk managementTask sharingTask shifting

Identifiers

PMID33213455
PMCPMC7677098
OpenAlexW3105792326

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.