Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35972977›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Using the Global Trigger Tool in surgical and neurosurgical patients: A feasibility study.

Mareen Brösterhaus, Antje Hammer, Rosalie Gruber, Steffen Kalina, Stefan Grau, Anjali A Roeth, Hany Ashmawy, Thomas Groß, Marcel Binnebösel, Wolfram Trudo Knoefel and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. 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. Article
  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

11 authors.

Mareen BrösterhausInstitute for Patient Safety, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4496-0893
Antje HammerInstitute for Patient Safety, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2724-9901
Rosalie GruberInstitute for Patient Safety, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Steffen KalinaCentral Division Medical Synergies, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Stefan GrauCenter of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Anjali A RoethDepartment of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Hany AshmawyHeinrich-Heine-Universität und Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
Thomas GroßCentral Division Medical Synergies, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Marcel BinneböselDepartment of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Wolfram Trudo KnoefelHeinrich-Heine-Universität und Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
Tanja ManserFHNW School of Applied Psychology, University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Northwestern Switzerland, Olten, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Global Trigger Tool (GTT) has become a worldwide used method for estimating adverse events through a retrospective patient record review. However, little is known about the facilitators and the challenges in the GTT-implementation process. Thus, this study followed two aims: First, to apply a comprehensive set of feasibility criteria to qualitatively and systematically assess the GTT-implementation process in three departments of German university hospitals. Second, to identify the facilitators and the obstacles met in the GTT-implementation process and to derive recommendations for supporting other hospitals in implementing the GTT in clinical practice.

methodsThe study used a qualitative documentary method based on process documentation, with written and verbal feedback from the reviewer, as well as evaluating the study sites during the implementation process. The study was conducted in three departments, each in a different German university hospital. The authors applied a comprehensive set of 22 feasibility criteria assessing the level of challenge in GTT implementation. The results were synthesized and they focused on the facilitators and the challenges.

resultsOf these 22 feasibility criteria, nine were assessed as a low-level challenge, eleven regarded as a moderate-level challenge, and two with a problematic level of challenge. In particular, the lack of time and staff resources, the quality of the information in the patient records, organizational procedures, and local issues, posed major challenges in the implementation process. By contrast, the use of local coordinators and an external expert made important contributions to the GTT implementation.

conclusionsConsidering the facilitators and the obstacles beforehand may help with the implementation of the GTT in routine practice. In particular, early and effective planning can reduce or prevent critical challenges in terms of time, staff resources, and organizational aspects.

Indexed as

Medical RecordsFeasibility StudiesHumansPrecipitating FactorsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID35972977
PMCPMC9380916

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.