Literature DB >> 15208233

Identifying and comparing risks in emergency medicine.

M Thomas1, R Morton, K Mackway-Jones.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To identify common risk types occurring in emergency departments (EDs). To compare the risks occurring between different emergency departments.
DESIGN: Application of a typology of risks to a database of critical incidents. Comparison of results of applying typology to group of critical incidents collected in a uniform manner in four different EDs.
SETTING: EDs in two teaching hospitals and two district general hospitals in the north west of England.
INTERVENTIONS: Observational study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Types of critical incidents identified. Statistical comparisons between EDs.
RESULTS: 816 critical incidents were classified. Patient assessment omission failures were the commonest type of failure, accounting for 291 (35.6%) of the critical incidents. Level 1 and level 2 failures accounted for 254 (31.1%) of critical incidents. Significant differences (p = 0.009) were shown between EDs when the categories of critical incidents occurring were compared. No significant differences (p = 0.336) were shown between EDs when the levels of severity of critical incidents occurring were compared.
CONCLUSIONS: Large numbers of critical incidents with potentially fatal consequences occur. The types of risks differ significantly between different EDs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15208233      PMCID: PMC1726399     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Med J        ISSN: 1472-0205            Impact factor:   2.740


  10 in total

1.  Diagnostic errors in an accident and emergency department.

Authors:  H R Guly
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 2.740

2.  Derivation of a typology for the classification of risks in emergency medicine.

Authors:  M Thomas; K Mackway-Jones; N Boreham
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 2.740

3.  Interpretation of trauma radiographs by junior doctors in accident and emergency departments: a cause for concern?

Authors:  C A McLauchlan; K Jones; H R Guly
Journal:  J Accid Emerg Med       Date:  1997-09

4.  Missed myocardial ischaemia in the accident & emergency department: E.C.G. a need for audit?

Authors:  W A McCallion; P A Templeton; L A McKinney; J D Higginson
Journal:  Arch Emerg Med       Date:  1991-06

5.  Electrocardiograph interpretation by junior doctors.

Authors:  W G Morrison; I J Swann
Journal:  Arch Emerg Med       Date:  1990-06

6.  Accuracy of detection of radiographic abnormalities by junior doctors.

Authors:  C A Vincent; P A Driscoll; R J Audley; D S Grant
Journal:  Arch Emerg Med       Date:  1988-06

7.  Care of minor injuries by emergency nurse practitioners or junior doctors: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  M Sakr; J Angus; J Perrin; C Nixon; J Nicholl; J Wardrope
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1999-10-16       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  The Quality in Australian Health Care Study.

Authors:  R M Wilson; W B Runciman; R W Gibberd; B T Harrison; L Newby; J D Hamilton
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  1995-11-06       Impact factor: 7.738

9.  Interpretation of the emergency electrocardiogram by junior hospital doctors.

Authors:  N D Gillespie; C T Brett; W G Morrison; S D Pringle
Journal:  J Accid Emerg Med       Date:  1996-11

10.  Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients. Results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I.

Authors:  T A Brennan; L L Leape; N M Laird; L Hebert; A R Localio; A G Lawthers; J P Newhouse; P C Weiler; H H Hiatt
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1991-02-07       Impact factor: 91.245

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.