事故报告质量的显著差异——芬兰四家急症医院的比较

Pub Date : 2021-12-27 DOI:10.1080/09617353.2022.2154023
Tuula Saarikoski, K. Haatainen, R. Roine, H. Turunen
{"title":"事故报告质量的显著差异——芬兰四家急症医院的比较","authors":"Tuula Saarikoski, K. Haatainen, R. Roine, H. Turunen","doi":"10.1080/09617353.2022.2154023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The aim of the study was to compare the quality of the description of the content of patient safety incident reports of ‘near miss’ and ‘adverse event’ occurrences and to examine whether the contributing factors behind the incident were identified. Data were collected from an electronic incident reporting system for a 1-year period (2015) in four acute hospitals in Finland. The analysis framework was based on the incident reporting guidelines, and the data were analysed using statistical methods. The most deficiencies were in records of the consequences of the event for the staff and unit (47%) and the consequences of the event (35%). The description of the content of ‘near miss’ situations did not differ significantly from ‘adverse event’ situations, but statistically significant differences were found between the hospitals in the quality of the description of the content of incident reports. Incident reports did not always identify the processes behind the incident or the factors that contributed to the occurrence of the incident, such as human error. Blaming was still evident in the incident report descriptions.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Significant differences in the quality of incident reports – a comparison of four acute hospitals in Finland\",\"authors\":\"Tuula Saarikoski, K. Haatainen, R. Roine, H. Turunen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09617353.2022.2154023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The aim of the study was to compare the quality of the description of the content of patient safety incident reports of ‘near miss’ and ‘adverse event’ occurrences and to examine whether the contributing factors behind the incident were identified. Data were collected from an electronic incident reporting system for a 1-year period (2015) in four acute hospitals in Finland. The analysis framework was based on the incident reporting guidelines, and the data were analysed using statistical methods. The most deficiencies were in records of the consequences of the event for the staff and unit (47%) and the consequences of the event (35%). The description of the content of ‘near miss’ situations did not differ significantly from ‘adverse event’ situations, but statistically significant differences were found between the hospitals in the quality of the description of the content of incident reports. Incident reports did not always identify the processes behind the incident or the factors that contributed to the occurrence of the incident, such as human error. Blaming was still evident in the incident report descriptions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09617353.2022.2154023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09617353.2022.2154023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:本研究的目的是比较“差点错过”和“不良事件”发生的患者安全事件报告内容描述的质量,并检查事件背后的促成因素是否被确定。数据从芬兰四家急症医院的电子事件报告系统中收集,为期一年(2015年)。分析框架基于事件报告指南,并使用统计方法对数据进行分析。缺陷最多的是对员工和单位的事件后果记录(47%)和事件后果记录(35%)。“差点错过”情况的内容描述与“不良事件”情况的内容描述没有显著差异,但在统计上发现医院之间在事件报告内容描述的质量上存在显著差异。事件报告并不总是确定事件背后的过程或导致事件发生的因素,例如人为错误。在事件报告的描述中,指责仍然很明显。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
Significant differences in the quality of incident reports – a comparison of four acute hospitals in Finland
Abstract The aim of the study was to compare the quality of the description of the content of patient safety incident reports of ‘near miss’ and ‘adverse event’ occurrences and to examine whether the contributing factors behind the incident were identified. Data were collected from an electronic incident reporting system for a 1-year period (2015) in four acute hospitals in Finland. The analysis framework was based on the incident reporting guidelines, and the data were analysed using statistical methods. The most deficiencies were in records of the consequences of the event for the staff and unit (47%) and the consequences of the event (35%). The description of the content of ‘near miss’ situations did not differ significantly from ‘adverse event’ situations, but statistically significant differences were found between the hospitals in the quality of the description of the content of incident reports. Incident reports did not always identify the processes behind the incident or the factors that contributed to the occurrence of the incident, such as human error. Blaming was still evident in the incident report descriptions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
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