ArticleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2025
Comparative analysis of routine clinical debriefings and incident reports: insights for patient safety and teamwork enhancement.
Article in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A qualitative, multi-framework methodology for analysing health information technology-related patient safety incidents.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- A novel approach to patient safety education: integrating the human factors analysis and classification system (HFACS) to build a culture of safety in medical training.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- What impact did the COVID-19 pandemic have on hospital complaints? A 7-year retrospective study in a Swiss public hospital.BMC health services research · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRoutine clinical debriefings (RCDs) have been shown to improve communication, team reflexivity, and safety in clinical settings. When combined with incident reports (IRs), RCDs offer a potential tool for enhancing quality improvement frameworks. This study aimed to identify and compare healthcare safety-related information captured through RCDs and IRs in a Belgian emergency department operating across two distinct facilities.
methodsThis study employed a quasi-mixed-method design with a monostrand conversion approach. Information was collected from 90 RCDs and 263 IRs. Data were analyzed using two frameworks: the World Health Organization's Incident Report Classification Grid and the Debriefing and Organizational Lessons Learned Grid.
resultsThe findings revealed significant differences in the types of information captured by RCDs and IRs. RCDs predominantly highlighted teamwork, internal organization, and procedural issues, while IRs focused more on care processes, patient concerns, and patient flow. These complementary insights demonstrate the value of integrating RCDs and IRs to create a comprehensive understanding of patient and clinician safety.
conclusionsThis study highlights the complementary nature of RCDs and IRs in addressing healthcare safety. RCDs foster team reflexivity and promote open discussions about systemic challenges, directly improving team cohesion, resilience, and learning. Combining RCDs and IRs provides actionable insights for enhancing safety and driving organizational improvements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.