Literature DB >> 20930624

Critical incident monitoring in paediatric and adult critical care: from reporting to improved patient outcomes?

Bernhard Frey1, David Schwappach.   

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Critical incident reporting alone does not necessarily improve patient safety or even patient outcomes. Substantial improvement has been made by focusing on the further two steps of critical incident monitoring, that is, the analysis of critical incidents and implementation of system changes. The system approach to patient safety had an impact on the view about the patient's role in safety. This review aims to analyse recent advances in the technique of reporting, the analysis of reported incidents, and the implementation of actual system improvements. It also explores how families should be approached about safety issues. RECENT
FINDINGS: It is essential to make as many critical incidents as possible known to the intensive care team. Several factors have been shown to increase the reporting rate: anonymity, regular feedback about the errors reported, and the existence of a safety climate. Risk scoring of critical incident reports and root cause analysis may help in the analysis of incidents. Research suggests that patients can be successfully involved in safety.
SUMMARY: A persisting high number of reported incidents is anticipated and regarded as continuing good safety culture. However, only the implementation of system changes, based on incident reports, and also involving the expertise of patients and their families, has the potential to improve patient outcome. Hard outcome criteria, such as standardized mortality ratio, have not yet been shown to improve as a result of critical incident monitoring.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20930624     DOI: 10.1097/MCC.0b013e32834044d8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Opin Crit Care        ISSN: 1070-5295            Impact factor:   3.687


  6 in total

1.  [Safety in intensive care medicine. Can we learn from aviation?].

Authors:  J Graf; S Pump; W Maas; U Stüben
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 0.840

2.  Near-miss events are really missed! Reflections on incident reporting in a department of pediatric surgery.

Authors:  Girolamo Mattioli; Edoardo Guida; Giovanni Montobbio; Alessio Pini Prato; Marcello Carlucci; Armando Cama; Silvio Boero; Maria Beatrice Michelis; Elio Castagnola; Ubaldo Rosati; Vincenzo Jasonni
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2012-01-07       Impact factor: 1.827

3.  The impact of patient safety culture and the leader coaching behaviour of nurses on the intention to report errors: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Zahra Chegini; Edris Kakemam; Mohammad Asghari Jafarabadi; Ali Janati
Journal:  BMC Nurs       Date:  2020-09-21

Review 4.  Preventable mortality evaluation in the ICU.

Authors:  L Marjon Dijkema; Willem Dieperink; Matijs van Meurs; Jan G Zijlstra
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 9.097

5.  The impact of a standardized incident reporting system in the perioperative setting: a single center experience on 2,563 'near-misses' and adverse events.

Authors:  Anita J Heideveld-Chevalking; Hiske Calsbeek; Johan Damen; Hein Gooszen; André P Wolff
Journal:  Patient Saf Surg       Date:  2014-12-10

6.  Mitigating Latent Threats Identified through an Embedded In Situ Simulation Program and Their Comparison to Patient Safety Incidents: A Retrospective Review.

Authors:  Philip Knight; Helen MacGloin; Mary Lane; Lydia Lofton; Ajay Desai; Elizabeth Haxby; Duncan Macrae; Cecilia Korb; Penny Mortimer; Margarita Burmester
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 3.418

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.