Katherine Hoops MD, MPH (is Attending Physician, Pediatric ICU, Johns Hopkins Hospital, and Assistant Professor, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore.), Ellen Pittman MD (is Pediatric Critical Care Medicine Fellow, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.), David C. Stockwell MD, MBA (is Chief Medical Officer, Johns Hopkins Children's Center, and Associate Professor, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Please address correspondence to Katherine Hoops)
{"title":"患者安全自愿事件报告中的差异:范围审查","authors":"Katherine Hoops MD, MPH (is Attending Physician, Pediatric ICU, Johns Hopkins Hospital, and Assistant Professor, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore.), Ellen Pittman MD (is Pediatric Critical Care Medicine Fellow, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.), David C. Stockwell MD, MBA (is Chief Medical Officer, Johns Hopkins Children's Center, and Associate Professor, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Please address correspondence to Katherine Hoops)","doi":"10.1016/j.jcjq.2023.10.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Voluntary event reporting (VER) systems underestimate the incidence of safety events and often capture only serious events. A limited amount of data is collected through these systems, and they may be inadequate to characterize disparities in reported safety events. We conducted a scoping review of the literature to summarize the state of the evidence as it relates to differences in safety events and safety event reporting by age, gender, and race. Using a broad-based query, a systematic search for published, peer-reviewed literature that discusses patient safety event reporting and differences by age, gender, race, and socioeconomic status was conducted. Based on modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 283 studies underwent title and abstract review, yielding 56 studies for full text review. After full text review, 23 studies were carefully reviewed individually, grouped thematically, and summarized to highlight the most pertinent findings. The studies reviewed yielded important insights, particularly with regard to race, gender, and the ways events are identified. Patients from minoritized groups may be less likely to have events reported and more likely to suffer serious events. Some studies found differences in rates of reporting safety events for female vs. male providers. The rate of VER is consistently lower than the rate of events identified through identified using automated detection. The current literature describing VER data shows disparities by race, language, age, and gender for patients and providers. Further research and systematic change are needed to specifically study these disparities to guide health care institutions on ways to mitigate bias and deliver more equitable care.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":14835,"journal":{"name":"Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155372502300260X/pdfft?md5=f0e17c95a7de5addbfa9f41aeeb6f244&pid=1-s2.0-S155372502300260X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disparities in Patient Safety Voluntary Event Reporting: A Scoping Review\",\"authors\":\"Katherine Hoops MD, MPH (is Attending Physician, Pediatric ICU, Johns Hopkins Hospital, and Assistant Professor, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore.), Ellen Pittman MD (is Pediatric Critical Care Medicine Fellow, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.), David C. Stockwell MD, MBA (is Chief Medical Officer, Johns Hopkins Children's Center, and Associate Professor, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Please address correspondence to Katherine Hoops)\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcjq.2023.10.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Voluntary event reporting (VER) systems underestimate the incidence of safety events and often capture only serious events. A limited amount of data is collected through these systems, and they may be inadequate to characterize disparities in reported safety events. We conducted a scoping review of the literature to summarize the state of the evidence as it relates to differences in safety events and safety event reporting by age, gender, and race. Using a broad-based query, a systematic search for published, peer-reviewed literature that discusses patient safety event reporting and differences by age, gender, race, and socioeconomic status was conducted. Based on modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 283 studies underwent title and abstract review, yielding 56 studies for full text review. After full text review, 23 studies were carefully reviewed individually, grouped thematically, and summarized to highlight the most pertinent findings. The studies reviewed yielded important insights, particularly with regard to race, gender, and the ways events are identified. Patients from minoritized groups may be less likely to have events reported and more likely to suffer serious events. Some studies found differences in rates of reporting safety events for female vs. male providers. The rate of VER is consistently lower than the rate of events identified through identified using automated detection. The current literature describing VER data shows disparities by race, language, age, and gender for patients and providers. Further research and systematic change are needed to specifically study these disparities to guide health care institutions on ways to mitigate bias and deliver more equitable care.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14835,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155372502300260X/pdfft?md5=f0e17c95a7de5addbfa9f41aeeb6f244&pid=1-s2.0-S155372502300260X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155372502300260X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155372502300260X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
自愿事件报告(VER)系统低估了安全事件的发生率,通常只记录严重事件。这些系统收集的数据量有限,可能不足以描述安全事件报告中的差异。我们对文献进行了范围界定,总结了与安全事件和安全事件报告中年龄、性别和种族差异相关的证据状况。通过广泛查询,我们对已发表的、经同行评审的、讨论患者安全事件报告以及不同年龄、性别、种族和社会经济地位的差异的文献进行了系统性检索。根据修改后的《系统综述和元分析首选报告项目》(PRISMA)指南,对 283 项研究进行了标题和摘要审阅,最后得出 56 项研究供全文审阅。全文审阅后,对 23 项研究进行了仔细的单独审阅、专题分组和总结,以突出最相关的研究结果。所审查的研究得出了重要的见解,尤其是在种族、性别和事件识别方式方面。来自少数群体的患者报告事件的可能性较低,而发生严重事件的可能性较高。一些研究发现,女性与男性医疗服务提供者的安全事件报告率存在差异。VER 的比率一直低于通过自动检测识别的事件比率。目前描述 VER 数据的文献显示,患者和医疗服务提供者在种族、语言、年龄和性别方面存在差异。我们需要进一步的研究和系统性变革来专门研究这些差异,以指导医疗机构如何减少偏见并提供更公平的医疗服务。
Disparities in Patient Safety Voluntary Event Reporting: A Scoping Review
Voluntary event reporting (VER) systems underestimate the incidence of safety events and often capture only serious events. A limited amount of data is collected through these systems, and they may be inadequate to characterize disparities in reported safety events. We conducted a scoping review of the literature to summarize the state of the evidence as it relates to differences in safety events and safety event reporting by age, gender, and race. Using a broad-based query, a systematic search for published, peer-reviewed literature that discusses patient safety event reporting and differences by age, gender, race, and socioeconomic status was conducted. Based on modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 283 studies underwent title and abstract review, yielding 56 studies for full text review. After full text review, 23 studies were carefully reviewed individually, grouped thematically, and summarized to highlight the most pertinent findings. The studies reviewed yielded important insights, particularly with regard to race, gender, and the ways events are identified. Patients from minoritized groups may be less likely to have events reported and more likely to suffer serious events. Some studies found differences in rates of reporting safety events for female vs. male providers. The rate of VER is consistently lower than the rate of events identified through identified using automated detection. The current literature describing VER data shows disparities by race, language, age, and gender for patients and providers. Further research and systematic change are needed to specifically study these disparities to guide health care institutions on ways to mitigate bias and deliver more equitable care.