Dataset Information

Implications from China patient safety incidents reporting system.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

We aimed to explain the operational mechanism of China National Patient Safety Incidents Reporting System, analyze patterns and trends of incidents reporting, and discuss the implication of the incidents reporting to improve hospital patient safety.

Design

A nationwide, registry-based, observational study design.

Data source

The database of China National Patient Safety Incidents Reporting System.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures of this study included the temporal, regional, and hospital distribution of the reports, as well as the incident type, location, parties, and possible reasons for frequently occurring incidents.

Results

During 2012-2017, 36,498 patient safety incidents were reported. By analyzing the time trends, we found that there was a significant upward trend on incidents reporting in China. The most common type of incidents was drug-related incidents, followed by nursing-related incidents and surgery-related incidents. The three most frequent locations of incident occurrence were Patient's Room (65.4%), Ambulatory Care Unit (8.4%), and Intensive Care Unit (7.4%). The majority of the incidents involved nurses (40.7%), followed by physicians (29.5%) and medical technologist (13.6%). About 44.4% of the incidents were attributed to the junior staff (work experience ≤5 years). In addition, incidents triggered by the senior staff (work experience >5 years) were more often associated with severe patient harm.

Conclusion

To strengthen the incidents reporting system and generate useful evidence through learning from incidents reporting will be important to China's success in improving the nation's patient safety status.

SUBMITTER: Gao X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6371930 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Understanding the causes of patient safety incidents is essential for improving patient safety; therefore, reporting and analysis of these incidents is a key imperative. Despite its implemention more than 15 years ago, the institutionalization of incident reporting in Indonesian hospitals is far from satisfactory. The aim of this study was to analyze the factors responsible for under-reporting of patient safety incidents in Indonesian public hospitals from the perspectives of leaders of hospitals, government departments, and independent institutions.MethodsA qualitative research methodology was adopted for this study using semi-structured interviews of key informants. 25 participants working at nine organizations (government departments, independent institutions, and public hospitals) were interviewed. The interview transcripts were analyzed using a deductive analytic approach. Nvivo 10 was used to for data processing prior to thematic analysis.ResultsThe key factors contributing to the under-reporting of patient safety incidents were categorized as hospital related and nonhospital related (government or independent agency). The hospital-related factors were: lack of understanding, knowledge, and responsibility for reporting; lack of leadership and institutional culture of reporting incidents; perception of reporting as an additional burden. The nonhospital-related factors were: lack of feedback and training; lack of confidentiality mechanisms in the system; absence of policy safeguards to prevent any punitive measures against the reporting hospital; lack of leadership.ConclusionOur study identified factors contributing to the under-reporting of patient safety incidents in Indonesia. The lack of government support and absence of political will to improve patient safety incident reporting appear to be the root causes of under-reporting. Our findings call for concerted efforts involving government, independent agencies, hospitals, and other stakeholders for instituting reforms in the patient safety incident reporting system.

Project description:BackgroundThe study objectives were to describe the incidence and the nature of patient safety incidents (PSIs) in primary care general practice settings, and to explore the association between these incidents and practice or organizational characteristics.MethodsGPs, randomly selected from a national influenza surveillance network (n = 800) across France, prospectively reported any incidents observed each day over a one-week period between May and July 2013. An incident was an event or circumstance that could have resulted, or did result, in harm to a patient, which the GP would not wish to recur. Primary outcome was the incidence of PSIs which was determined by counting reports per total number of patient encounters. Reports were categorized using existing taxonomies. The association with practice and organizational characteristics was calculated using a negative binomial regression model.Results127 GPs (participation rate 79%) reported 317 incidents of which 270 were deemed to be a posteriori judged preventable, among 12,348 encounters. 77% had no consequences for the patient. The incidence of reported PSIs was 26 per 1000 patient encounters per week (95% CI [23‰ -28‰]). Incidents were three times more frequently related to the organization of healthcare than to knowledge and skills of health professionals, and especially to the workflow in the GPs' offices and to the communication between providers and with patients. Among GP characteristics, three were related with an increased incidence in the final multivariable model: length of consultation higher than 15 minutes, method of receiving radiological results (by fax compared to paper or email), and being in a multidisciplinary clinic compared with sole practitioners.ConclusionsPatient safety incidents (PSIs) occurred in mean once every two days in the sampled GPs and 2% of them were associated with a definite possibility for harm. Studying the association between organizational features of general practices and PSIs remains a major challenge and one of the most important issues for safety in primary care.

Project description:The effectiveness of a hospital incident-reporting system (IRS) on improve patient safety is unclear. This study objective was to assess which implemented improvement actions after the analysis of the incidents reported were effective in reduce near-misses or adverse events.Patient safety incidents (PSIs), near misses and adverse events, notified to the IRS were analyzed by local clinical safety leaders (CSLs) who propose and implement improvement actions. The local CSLs received training workshops in patient safety and analysis tools. Following the notification of a PSI in the IRS, prospective real-time observations with external staff were planned to record and rated the frequency of that PSI. This methodology was repeated after the implementation of the improvement actions.Ultimately, 1983 PSIs were identified. Surgery theaters, emergency departments, intensive care units, and general adult care units comprised 82% of all PSIs. The PSI rate increased from 0.39 to 3.4 per 1000 stays in 42 months. A significant correlation was found between the reporting rate per month and the number of workshop-trained local CSLs (Spearman coefficient?=?0.874; P?=?.003). A total of 24,836 real-time observations showed a statistically significant reduction in PSIs observed in 63.15% (categories: medication P?=?.044; communication P?=?.037; technology P?=?.009) of the implemented improvements actions, but not in the organization category (P?=?.094). In the multivariate analyses, the following factors were associated with the reduction in near misses or adverse events after the implementation of the improvement actions: "adverse event" type of PSI (odds ratio [OR], 3.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.93-5.74), "disussion group" type of analysis (OR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.52-3.76), and root cause type of analysis (OR, 2.32; 95% CI: 1.17-3.90).The implementation of a hospital IRS, together with the systematization of the method and analysis of PSIs by workshop-trained local CSLs led to an important reduction in the frequency of PSIs.

Project description:IntroductionApproximately 20% of serious safety incidents involving palliative patients relate to medication. These are disproportionately reported when patients are in their usual residence when compared with hospital or hospice. While patient safety incident reporting systems can support professional learning, it is unclear whether these reports encompass patient and carer concerns with palliative medications or interpersonal safety.AimTo explore and compare perceptions of (un)safe palliative medication management from patient, carer and professional perspectives in community, hospital and hospice settings.Methods and analysisWe will use an innovative mixed-methods study design combining systematic review searching techniques with cross-sectional quantitative descriptive analysis and interpretative qualitative metasynthesis to integrate three elements: (1) Scoping review: multiple database searches for empirical studies and first-hand experiences in English (no other restrictions) to establish how patients and informal carers conceptualise safety in palliative medication management. (2)Medication incidents from the England and Wales National Reporting and Learning System: identifying and characterising reports to understand professional perspectives on suboptimal palliative medication management. (3) Comparison of 1 and 2: contextualising with stakeholder perspectives.Patient and public involvementOur team includes a funded patient and public involvement (PPI) collaborator, with experience of promoting patient-centred approaches in patient safety research. Funded discussion and dissemination events with PPI and healthcare (clinical and policy) professionals are planned.Ethics and disseminationProspective ethical approval granted: Cardiff University School of Medicine Research Ethics Committee (Ref 19/28). Our study will synthesise multivoiced constructions of patient safety in palliative care to identify implications for professional learning and actions that are relevant across health and social care. It will also identify changing or escalating patterns in palliative medication incidents due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Peer-reviewed publications, academic presentations, plain English summaries, press releases and social media will be used to disseminate to the public, researchers, clinicians and policy-makers.