MR- safety: Evaluation of compliance with screening routines using a structured screening interview

IF 0.6 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of patient safety and risk management Pub Date : 2022-02-01 DOI:10.1177/25160435221077493
B. Hansson, Matea Simic, J. Olsrud, K. Markenroth Bloch, T. Owman, P. Sundgren, I. Björkman-Burtscher
{"title":"MR- safety: Evaluation of compliance with screening routines using a structured screening interview","authors":"B. Hansson, Matea Simic, J. Olsrud, K. Markenroth Bloch, T. Owman, P. Sundgren, I. Björkman-Burtscher","doi":"10.1177/25160435221077493","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Magnetic resonance (MR) safety procedures are designed to allow patients, research subjects and personnel to enter the MR-scanner room under controlled conditions and without the risk to be harmed during the examination. Ferromagnetic objects in the MR-environment or inside the human body represent the main safety risks potentially leading to human injuries. Screening for MR-safety risks with dedicated procedures is therefore mandatory. As human errors during the screening procedure might align and lead to an incident compliance is essential. Purpose To evaluate compliance with a documented structured MR-safety screening process. Method Written and signed MR-safety screening documentation collected at a national 7T MR facility during a four-year period was evaluated for compliance of trained personnel with multi-step MR-safety routines. We analysed whether examinations were performed or why they were not performed. Data analysis further included descriptive statistics of the study population (age, gender and patient or healthy volunteer status), identification of missing documents and omitted or incorrect answers, and whether these compliance shortcomings concerned predominantly administrative or MR-safety related issues. Results Documentation of the screening process in 1819 subjects was incomplete in 19% of subjects. The most common documentation shortcoming was omitted fields. Out of 478 omitted answer-fields in 307 subjects, 36% were of administrative nature and 64% related directly to MR-safety issues. Conclusion Compliance with MR-safety screening procedures cannot be taken for granted and deficiencies to comply with screening routines were revealed. Documentation shortcomings concerned both administrative and MR-safety related issues.","PeriodicalId":73888,"journal":{"name":"Journal of patient safety and risk management","volume":"11 1 1","pages":"76 - 82"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of patient safety and risk management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/25160435221077493","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Magnetic resonance (MR) safety procedures are designed to allow patients, research subjects and personnel to enter the MR-scanner room under controlled conditions and without the risk to be harmed during the examination. Ferromagnetic objects in the MR-environment or inside the human body represent the main safety risks potentially leading to human injuries. Screening for MR-safety risks with dedicated procedures is therefore mandatory. As human errors during the screening procedure might align and lead to an incident compliance is essential. Purpose To evaluate compliance with a documented structured MR-safety screening process. Method Written and signed MR-safety screening documentation collected at a national 7T MR facility during a four-year period was evaluated for compliance of trained personnel with multi-step MR-safety routines. We analysed whether examinations were performed or why they were not performed. Data analysis further included descriptive statistics of the study population (age, gender and patient or healthy volunteer status), identification of missing documents and omitted or incorrect answers, and whether these compliance shortcomings concerned predominantly administrative or MR-safety related issues. Results Documentation of the screening process in 1819 subjects was incomplete in 19% of subjects. The most common documentation shortcoming was omitted fields. Out of 478 omitted answer-fields in 307 subjects, 36% were of administrative nature and 64% related directly to MR-safety issues. Conclusion Compliance with MR-safety screening procedures cannot be taken for granted and deficiencies to comply with screening routines were revealed. Documentation shortcomings concerned both administrative and MR-safety related issues.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
MR-安全性:使用结构化的筛查访谈评估对筛查程序的依从性
磁共振(MR)安全程序旨在允许患者、研究对象和工作人员在受控条件下进入磁共振扫描仪室,并且在检查过程中没有受到伤害的风险。核磁共振环境或人体内部的铁磁性物体是可能导致人体伤害的主要安全隐患。因此,使用专用程序筛查核磁共振安全风险是强制性的。由于筛选过程中的人为错误可能对齐并导致事件,因此遵从性是必不可少的。目的评估核磁共振安全筛选过程的依从性。方法在国家7T核磁共振设施收集的四年期间书面和签名的核磁共振安全筛查文件,评估训练人员对多步骤核磁共振安全程序的依从性。我们分析了是否进行检查以及为什么不进行检查。数据分析进一步包括对研究人群(年龄、性别和患者或健康志愿者状态)的描述性统计,识别缺失的文件和遗漏或不正确的答案,以及这些合规性缺陷是否主要涉及行政或核磁共振安全相关问题。结果1819名受试者中,19%的受试者对筛查过程的记录不完整。最常见的文档缺点是省略字段。在307名受试者的478个被省略的回答字段中,36%具有行政性质,64%直接与核磁共振安全问题相关。结论不能想当然地认为遵守核磁共振安全筛查程序是理所当然的,并发现了遵守筛查程序的不足之处。文件缺陷涉及管理和核磁共振安全相关问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Health Services Safety Investigations Body (HSSIB) and safety management systems: An integrated approach to managing safety in healthcare Challenges of integrating patient safety into nursing curricula: An integrative literature review Patient safety near misses – Still missing opportunities to learn A five-step approach to safer skin surgery Gaps in patient safety: Areas that need our attention
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1