Literature DB >> 27623822

Patient safety in otolaryngology: a descriptive review.

Julian Danino1, Jameel Muzaffar2, Chris Metcalfe2, Chris Coulson2.   

Abstract

Human evaluation and judgement may include errors that can have disastrous results. Within medicine and healthcare there has been slow progress towards major changes in safety. Healthcare lags behind other specialised industries, such as aviation and nuclear power, where there have been significant improvements in overall safety, especially in reducing risk of errors. Following several high profile cases in the USA during the 1990s, a report titled "To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System" was published. The report extrapolated that in the USA approximately 50,000 to 100,000 patients may die each year as a result of medical errors. Traditionally otolaryngology has always been regarded as a "safe specialty". A study in the USA in 2004 inferred that there may be 2600 cases of major morbidity and 165 deaths within the specialty. MEDLINE via PubMed interface was searched for English language articles published between 2000 and 2012. Each combined two or three of the keywords noted earlier. Limitations are related to several generic topics within patient safety in otolaryngology. Other areas covered have been current relevant topics due to recent interest or new advances in technology. There has been a heightened awareness within the healthcare community of patient safety; it has become a major priority. Focus has shifted from apportioning blame to prevention of the errors and implementation of patient safety mechanisms in healthcare delivery. Type of Errors can be divided into errors due to action and errors due to knowledge or planning. In healthcare there are several factors that may influence adverse events and patient safety. Although technology may improve patient safety, it also introduces new sources of error. The ability to work with people allows for the increase in safety netting. Team working has been shown to have a beneficial effect on patient safety. Any field of work involving human decision-making will always have a risk of error. Within Otolaryngology, although patient safety has evolved along similar themes as other surgical specialties; there are several specific high-risk areas. Medical error is a common problem and its human cost is of immense importance. Steps to reduce such errors require the identification of high-risk practice within a complex healthcare system. The commitment to patient safety and quality improvement in medicine depend on personal responsibility and professional accountability.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Allied healthcare professionals; Diagnostic error; Disinfection of equipment; Laser safety; Medical error; Medication error; Otolaryngology; Patient safety; Preventable adverse event; Provision of emergency service; Wrong-site surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27623822     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-016-4291-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  41 in total

1.  The disinfection of flexible fibre-optic nasendoscopes out-of-hours: confidential telephone survey of ENT units in England.

Authors:  J Kanagalingam; A Zainal; C Georgalas; S Paun; N S Tolley
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 1.469

2.  Litigation trends and costs in otorhinolaryngology.

Authors:  C W Metcalfe; S J Muzaffar; C J Coulson
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 1.469

3.  A study of out-of-hours facilities in otolaryngology: current provision and problems.

Authors:  R Moorthy; M Magarey; A Joshi; S M Jayaraj; P M Clarke
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 1.469

4.  Errors and adverse events in otolaryngology.

Authors:  Lina Lander; David W Roberson; Rahul K Shah
Journal:  Ear Nose Throat J       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.697

5.  Night emergency cover for ENT in England: a national survey.

Authors:  D Biswas; A Rafferty; P Jassar
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  2009-03-02       Impact factor: 1.469

6.  A comparison of two methods for preventing cross-contamination when using flexible fiberoptic endoscopes in an otolaryngology clinic: disposable sterile sheaths versus immersion in germicidal liquid.

Authors:  Alphi Elackattu; Mary Zoccoli; Jeffrey H Spiegel; Kenneth M Grundfast
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  Towards better patient safety: WHO Surgical Safety Checklist in otorhinolaryngology.

Authors:  P Helmiö; K Blomgren; A Takala; S-L Pauniaho; R S K Takala; T S Ikonen
Journal:  Clin Otolaryngol       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 2.597

8.  Understanding adverse events: human factors.

Authors:  J Reason
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1995-06

9.  Speech therapist led voice clinic: which patients may be suitable?

Authors:  Hersad M Vaghela; Neil Fergie; Suzanne Slade; Julian A McGlashan
Journal:  Logoped Phoniatr Vocol       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 1.487

Review 10.  Patient safety in dermatology: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Lauren Y Cao; James S Taylor; Allison Vidimos
Journal:  Dermatol Online J       Date:  2010-01-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.