Andre Carlos Kajdacsy-Balla Amaral1, Andrew McDonald2, Natalie G Coburn3, Wei Xiong4, Kaveh G Shojania5, Robert A Fowler1, Martin Chapman1, Neill K J Adhikari1. 1. Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care, University of Toronto, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. Department of General Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 4. Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 5. Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Adverse events (AEs) affect 3-12% of hospitalised patients. These are estimates from a labour-intensive chart review process,which is not feasible outside research. Clinical deterioration on the wards triggers a rapid response teams (RRTs) consult and can be used to identify an AE prospectively. OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate the feasibility of using RRT to detect AEs and compare this methodology to the rates reported using an electronic safety reporting system. METHODS: Prospective observational cohort of RRT consults. Three independent physicians reviewed all cases for the occurrence of an AE and its preventability. We summarise AEs as rates per 1000 patient-days, and compared the rates between RRT and the safety reporting system using a Poisson model. RESULTS: There were 8713 hospital admissions, with 531 RRT consults and 247 (2.8%) cases included. Forty-four (17.8%) and 35 cases (14.2%) were judged as AEs and preventable AEs, respectively. RRT identified 0.52 AE/1000 patient-days, compared with 0.21 AE/1000 patient-days detected through the electronic safety reporting system (rate ratio 2.4, 95% CI 1.4 to 4.2, p=0.0014). Patients in surgical wards had more AEs (0.83/1000 vs 0.36/1000, p<0.01) and preventable AEs (0.70 vs 0.21, p<0.01) than patients in medical wards. Agreement for AE (κ 0.46, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.53) and preventable AE (κ 0.47, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.53) was moderate among reviewers. CONCLUSIONS: Reviewing RRT consults identified a high proportion of AEs and preventable AEs. This methodology detected twice as many AEs as the hospital's safety reporting system. RRT clinicians provide a complementary and more sensitive mechanism than traditional safety reporting systems to identify possible AEs in hospitals. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
INTRODUCTION: Adverse events (AEs) affect 3-12% of hospitalised patients. These are estimates from a labour-intensive chart review process,which is not feasible outside research. Clinical deterioration on the wards triggers a rapid response teams (RRTs) consult and can be used to identify an AE prospectively. OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate the feasibility of using RRT to detect AEs and compare this methodology to the rates reported using an electronic safety reporting system. METHODS: Prospective observational cohort of RRT consults. Three independent physicians reviewed all cases for the occurrence of an AE and its preventability. We summarise AEs as rates per 1000 patient-days, and compared the rates between RRT and the safety reporting system using a Poisson model. RESULTS: There were 8713 hospital admissions, with 531 RRT consults and 247 (2.8%) cases included. Forty-four (17.8%) and 35 cases (14.2%) were judged as AEs and preventable AEs, respectively. RRT identified 0.52 AE/1000 patient-days, compared with 0.21 AE/1000 patient-days detected through the electronic safety reporting system (rate ratio 2.4, 95% CI 1.4 to 4.2, p=0.0014). Patients in surgical wards had more AEs (0.83/1000 vs 0.36/1000, p<0.01) and preventable AEs (0.70 vs 0.21, p<0.01) than patients in medical wards. Agreement for AE (κ 0.46, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.53) and preventable AE (κ 0.47, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.53) was moderate among reviewers. CONCLUSIONS: Reviewing RRT consults identified a high proportion of AEs and preventable AEs. This methodology detected twice as many AEs as the hospital's safety reporting system. RRT clinicians provide a complementary and more sensitive mechanism than traditional safety reporting systems to identify possible AEs in hospitals. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Entities:
Keywords:
Adverse events, epidemiology and detection; Chart review methodologies; Human error; Incident reporting; Medical emergency team
Authors: Maria das Dores Graciano Silva; Maria Auxiliadora Parreiras Martins; Luciana de Gouvêa Viana; Luiz Guilherme Passaglia; Renata Rezende de Menezes; João Antonio de Queiroz Oliveira; Jose Luiz Padilha da Silva; Antonio Luiz Pinho Ribeiro Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2018-07-08 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Viraj Bhise; Dean F Sittig; Viralkumar Vaghani; Li Wei; Jessica Baldwin; Hardeep Singh Journal: BMJ Qual Saf Date: 2017-09-21 Impact factor: 7.035
Authors: Shannon M Fernando; Peter M Reardon; Sean M Bagshaw; Damon C Scales; Kyle Murphy; Jennifer Shen; Peter Tanuseputro; Daren K Heyland; Kwadwo Kyeremanteng Journal: Crit Care Date: 2018-03-14 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Abigail K Albutt; Jane K O'Hara; Mark T Conner; Stephen J Fletcher; Rebecca J Lawton Journal: Health Expect Date: 2016-10-26 Impact factor: 3.377