Observational studyFrontiers in public health2025
Adverse events identified by a trigger tool as indicators of patient safety and safety management in a medical department.
Observational study in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Adverse events (AEs) in hospital settings pose a significant threat to patient safety, particularly in patients with multiple comorbidities. Systematic detection tools, such as the Global Trigger Tool, have proven to be more sensitive than traditional voluntary reporting systems in identifying AEs. Objective: This study analyzes the prevalence, characteristics, and factors associated with the occurrence of AEs in an internal medicine department, focusing on patients with multiple morbidities, using a combined approach that integrates the European Portuguese version of the Global Trigger Tool (GTT-PT) and a voluntary reporting system. Methods: This observational, retrospective, exploratory study was conducted in four internal medicine departments at a Portuguese hospital center. A total of 360 randomly selected clinical records were included in this study. AEs were identified using the GTT-PT and by analyzing voluntary incident reports. Sociodemographic and clinical variables were analyzed using binary logistic regression. Results: A total of 718 AEs were identified, of which 564 (78.6%) occurred during hospitalization. Most events were of moderate severity (categories E and F in the Institute for Healthcare Improvement classification). Length of hospital stay was the main predictor of AEs occurrence (odds ratio [OR] range 1.011-1.173). The use of a nasogastric tube was also significantly associated with increased AE risk (OR = 6.693). The GTT-PT detected significantly more events than the voluntary reporting system. Conclusion: The combined use of the GTT-PT and voluntary reporting systems is highly effective in detecting AEs in internal medicine settings. Length of hospital stay and use of invasive devices are key factors associated with AE occurrence. These findings underscore the importance of institutional policies that support a non-punitive safety culture and encourage the systematic integration of proactive monitoring methodologies into clinical practice.
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.