Literature DB >> 10468380

Reasons for not reporting adverse incidents: an empirical study.

C Vincent1, N Stanhope, M Crowley-Murphy.   

Abstract

A previous study (Stanhope et al. 1998) established that staff in two obstetric units reported less than a quarter of designated incidents to the units' risk managers. A questionnaire was administered to 42 obstetricians and 156 midwives at the same two obstetric units, exploring the reasons for low rates of reporting. Questions concerned their knowledge of their unit's incident reporting system; whether they would report a series of 10 designated adverse obstetric incidents to the risk manager; and their views on 12 potential reasons for not reporting incidents. Most staff knew about the incident-reporting system in their unit, but almost 30% did not know how to find a list of reportable incidents. Views on the necessity of reporting the 10 designated obstetric incidents varied considerably. For example, 96% of staff stated they would always report a maternal death, whereas less than 40% would report a baby's unexpected admission to the Special Care Baby Unit. Midwives said they were more likely to report incidents than doctors, and junior staff were more likely to report than senior staff. The main reasons for not reporting were fears that junior staff would be blamed, high workload and the belief (even though the incident was designated as reportable) that the circumstances or outcome of a particular case did not warrant a report. Junior doctors felt less supported by their colleagues than senior doctors. Current systems of incident reporting, while providing some valuable information, do not provide a reliable index of the rate of adverse incidents. Recommended measures to increase reliability include clearer definitions of incidents, simplified methods of reporting, designated staff to record incidents and education, feedback and reassurance to staff about the nature and purpose of such systems.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10468380     DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2753.1999.00147.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract        ISSN: 1356-1294            Impact factor:   2.431


  45 in total

1.  Setting up a database of medical error in general practice: conceptual and methodological considerations.

Authors:  A Sheikh; B Hurwitz
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 2.  Reporting and preventing medical mishaps: lessons from non-medical near miss reporting systems.

Authors:  P Barach; S D Small
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-03-18

3.  Defining and classifying medical error: lessons for patient safety reporting systems.

Authors:  M Tamuz; E J Thomas; K E Franchois
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2004-02

4.  Pitfalls of adverse event reporting in paediatric cardiac intensive care.

Authors:  M Ricci; A P Goldman; M R de Leval; G A Cohen; F Devaney; J Carthey
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.791

5.  Automated identification of extreme-risk events in clinical incident reports.

Authors:  Mei-Sing Ong; Farah Magrabi; Enrico Coiera
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 6.  Improving patient safety in hospitals: Contributions of high-reliability theory and normal accident theory.

Authors:  Michal Tamuz; Michael I Harrison
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  Lag time in an incident reporting system at a university hospital in Japan.

Authors:  Masahiro Hirose; Scott E Regenbogen; Stuart Lipsitz; Yuichi Imanaka; Tatsuro Ishizaki; Miho Sekimoto; Eun-Hwan Oh; Atul A Gawande
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2007-04

8.  Status and problems of adverse event reporting systems in korean hospitals.

Authors:  Jeongeun Kim; Sukwha Kim; Yoenyi Jung; Eun-Kyung Kim
Journal:  Healthc Inform Res       Date:  2010-09-30

9.  Experience of wrong site surgery and surgical marking practices among clinicians in the UK.

Authors:  Sally J Giles; Penny Rhodes; Gill Clements; Gary A Cook; Ruth Hayton; Melanie J Maxwell; Trevor A Sheldon; John Wright
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2006-10

10.  Organization and representation of patient safety data: current status and issues around generalizability and scalability.

Authors:  Aziz A Boxwala; Meghan Dierks; Maura Keenan; Susan Jackson; Robert Hanscom; David W Bates; Luke Sato
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2004-08-06       Impact factor: 4.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.