L M McElroy1, D M Woods1, A F Yanes2, A I Skaro2, A Daud1, T Curtis1, E Wymore1, J L Holl1, M M Abecassis2, D P Ladner1. 1. Center for Healthcare Studies, Institute for Public Health and Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA Northwestern University Transplant Outcomes Research Collaborative (NUTORC), Comprehensive Transplant Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA. 2. Northwestern University Transplant Outcomes Research Collaborative (NUTORC), Comprehensive Transplant Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Efforts to improve patient safety are challenged by the lack of universally agreed upon terms. The International Classification for Patient Safety (ICPS) was developed by the World Health Organization for this purpose. This study aimed to test the applicability of the ICPS to a surgical population. DESIGN: A web-based safety debriefing was sent to clinicians involved in surgical care of abdominal organ transplant patients. A multidisciplinary team of patient safety experts, surgeons and researchers used the data to develop a system of classification based on the ICPS. Disagreements were reconciled via consensus, and a codebook was developed for future use by researchers. RESULTS: A total of 320 debriefing responses were used for the initial review and codebook development. In total, the 320 debriefing responses contained 227 patient safety incidents (range: 0-7 per debriefing) and 156 contributing factors/hazards (0-5 per response). The most common severity classification was 'reportable circumstance,' followed by 'near miss.' The most common incident types were 'resources/organizational management,' followed by 'medical device/equipment.' Several aspects of surgical care were encompassed by more than one classification, including operating room scheduling, delays in care, trainee-related incidents, interruptions and handoffs. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that a framework for patient safety can be applied to facilitate the organization and analysis of surgical safety data. Several unique aspects of surgical care require consideration, and by using a standardized framework for describing concepts, research findings can be compared and disseminated across surgical specialties. The codebook is intended for use as a framework for other specialties and institutions.
OBJECTIVE: Efforts to improve patient safety are challenged by the lack of universally agreed upon terms. The International Classification for Patient Safety (ICPS) was developed by the World Health Organization for this purpose. This study aimed to test the applicability of the ICPS to a surgical population. DESIGN: A web-based safety debriefing was sent to clinicians involved in surgical care of abdominal organ transplant patients. A multidisciplinary team of patient safety experts, surgeons and researchers used the data to develop a system of classification based on the ICPS. Disagreements were reconciled via consensus, and a codebook was developed for future use by researchers. RESULTS: A total of 320 debriefing responses were used for the initial review and codebook development. In total, the 320 debriefing responses contained 227 patient safety incidents (range: 0-7 per debriefing) and 156 contributing factors/hazards (0-5 per response). The most common severity classification was 'reportable circumstance,' followed by 'near miss.' The most common incident types were 'resources/organizational management,' followed by 'medical device/equipment.' Several aspects of surgical care were encompassed by more than one classification, including operating room scheduling, delays in care, trainee-related incidents, interruptions and handoffs. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that a framework for patient safety can be applied to facilitate the organization and analysis of surgical safety data. Several unique aspects of surgical care require consideration, and by using a standardized framework for describing concepts, research findings can be compared and disseminated across surgical specialties. The codebook is intended for use as a framework for other specialties and institutions.
Authors: Andrew Chang; Paul M Schyve; Richard J Croteau; Dennis S O'Leary; Jerod M Loeb Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2005-02-21 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: Saskia E Drösler; Patrick S Romano; Vijaya Sundararajan; Bernard Burnand; Cyrille Colin; Harold Pincus; William Ghali Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2013-12-13 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: William Runciman; Peter Hibbert; Richard Thomson; Tjerk Van Der Schaaf; Heather Sherman; Pierre Lewalle Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: Alison Cooper; Adrian Edwards; Huw Williams; Huw P Evans; Anthony Avery; Peter Hibbert; Meredith Makeham; Aziz Sheikh; Liam J Donaldson; Andrew Carson-Stevens Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Richard Simon Young; Paul Deslandes; Jennifer Cooper; Huw Williams; Joyce Kenkre; Andrew Carson-Stevens Journal: Ther Adv Drug Saf Date: 2020-06-07
Authors: Huw Williams; Sir Liam Donaldson; Simon Noble; Peter Hibbert; Rhiannon Watson; Joyce Kenkre; Adrian Edwards; Andrew Carson-Stevens Journal: Palliat Med Date: 2018-12-12 Impact factor: 4.762
Authors: Ussamah El-Khani; Hutan Ashrafian; Shahnawaz Rasheed; Harald Veen; Ammar Darwish; David Nott; Ara Darzi Journal: BMJ Glob Health Date: 2019-11-14
Authors: Maria Randmaa; Maria Engström; Gunilla Mårtensson; Christine Leo Swenne; Hans Högberg Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-12-10 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Jesus Maria Aranaz Andrés; Ramon Limón Ramírez; Carlos Aibar Remón; Maria Teresa Gea-Velázquez de Castro; Francisco Bolúmar; Ildefonso Hernández-Aguado; Nieves López Fresneña; Cristina Díaz-Agero Pérez; Enrique Terol García; Philippe Michel; Paulo Sousa; Itziar Larizgoitia Jauregui Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-10-08 Impact factor: 2.692