Cargando…

Emergency department patient safety incident characterization: an observational analysis of the findings of a standardized peer review process

BACKGROUND: Emergency Department (ED) care has been reported to be prone to patient safety incidents (PSIs). Improving our understanding of PSIs is essential to prevent them. A standardized, peer review process was implemented to identify and analyze ED PSIs. The primary objective of this investigat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jepson, Zach K, Darling, Chad E, Kotkowski, Kevin A, Bird, Steven B, Arce, Michael W, Volturo, Gregory A, Reznek, Martin A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4132274/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25106803
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-227X-14-20
_version_ 1782330594763472896
author Jepson, Zach K
Darling, Chad E
Kotkowski, Kevin A
Bird, Steven B
Arce, Michael W
Volturo, Gregory A
Reznek, Martin A
author_facet Jepson, Zach K
Darling, Chad E
Kotkowski, Kevin A
Bird, Steven B
Arce, Michael W
Volturo, Gregory A
Reznek, Martin A
author_sort Jepson, Zach K
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Emergency Department (ED) care has been reported to be prone to patient safety incidents (PSIs). Improving our understanding of PSIs is essential to prevent them. A standardized, peer review process was implemented to identify and analyze ED PSIs. The primary objective of this investigation was to characterize ED PSIs identified by the peer review process. A secondary objective was to characterize PSIs that led to patient harm. In addition, we sought to provide a detailed description of the peer review process for others to consider as they conduct their own quality improvement initiatives. METHODS: An observational study was conducted in a large, urban, tertiary-care ED. Over a two-year period, all ED incident reports were investigated via a standardized, peer review process. PSIs were identified and analyzed for contributing factors including systems failures and practitioner-based errors. The classification system for factors contributing to PSIs was developed based on systems previously reported in the emergency medicine literature as well as the investigators’ experience in quality improvement and peer review. All cases in which a PSI was discovered were further adjudicated to determine if patient harm resulted. RESULTS: In 24 months, 469 cases were investigated, identifying 152 PSIs. In total, 188 systems failures and 96 practitioner-based errors were found to have contributed to the PSIs. In twelve cases, patient harm was determined to have resulted from PSIs. Systems failures were identified in eleven of the twelve cases in which a PSI resulted in patient harm. CONCLUSION: Systems failures were almost twice as likely as practitioner-based errors to contribute to PSIs, and systems failures were present in the majority of cases resulting in patient harm. To effectively reduce PSIs, ED quality improvement initiatives should focus on systems failure reduction.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4132274
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41322742014-08-15 Emergency department patient safety incident characterization: an observational analysis of the findings of a standardized peer review process Jepson, Zach K Darling, Chad E Kotkowski, Kevin A Bird, Steven B Arce, Michael W Volturo, Gregory A Reznek, Martin A BMC Emerg Med Research Article BACKGROUND: Emergency Department (ED) care has been reported to be prone to patient safety incidents (PSIs). Improving our understanding of PSIs is essential to prevent them. A standardized, peer review process was implemented to identify and analyze ED PSIs. The primary objective of this investigation was to characterize ED PSIs identified by the peer review process. A secondary objective was to characterize PSIs that led to patient harm. In addition, we sought to provide a detailed description of the peer review process for others to consider as they conduct their own quality improvement initiatives. METHODS: An observational study was conducted in a large, urban, tertiary-care ED. Over a two-year period, all ED incident reports were investigated via a standardized, peer review process. PSIs were identified and analyzed for contributing factors including systems failures and practitioner-based errors. The classification system for factors contributing to PSIs was developed based on systems previously reported in the emergency medicine literature as well as the investigators’ experience in quality improvement and peer review. All cases in which a PSI was discovered were further adjudicated to determine if patient harm resulted. RESULTS: In 24 months, 469 cases were investigated, identifying 152 PSIs. In total, 188 systems failures and 96 practitioner-based errors were found to have contributed to the PSIs. In twelve cases, patient harm was determined to have resulted from PSIs. Systems failures were identified in eleven of the twelve cases in which a PSI resulted in patient harm. CONCLUSION: Systems failures were almost twice as likely as practitioner-based errors to contribute to PSIs, and systems failures were present in the majority of cases resulting in patient harm. To effectively reduce PSIs, ED quality improvement initiatives should focus on systems failure reduction. BioMed Central 2014-08-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4132274/ /pubmed/25106803 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-227X-14-20 Text en Copyright © 2014 Jepson et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Jepson, Zach K
Darling, Chad E
Kotkowski, Kevin A
Bird, Steven B
Arce, Michael W
Volturo, Gregory A
Reznek, Martin A
Emergency department patient safety incident characterization: an observational analysis of the findings of a standardized peer review process
title Emergency department patient safety incident characterization: an observational analysis of the findings of a standardized peer review process
title_full Emergency department patient safety incident characterization: an observational analysis of the findings of a standardized peer review process
title_fullStr Emergency department patient safety incident characterization: an observational analysis of the findings of a standardized peer review process
title_full_unstemmed Emergency department patient safety incident characterization: an observational analysis of the findings of a standardized peer review process
title_short Emergency department patient safety incident characterization: an observational analysis of the findings of a standardized peer review process
title_sort emergency department patient safety incident characterization: an observational analysis of the findings of a standardized peer review process
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4132274/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25106803
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-227X-14-20
work_keys_str_mv AT jepsonzachk emergencydepartmentpatientsafetyincidentcharacterizationanobservationalanalysisofthefindingsofastandardizedpeerreviewprocess
AT darlingchade emergencydepartmentpatientsafetyincidentcharacterizationanobservationalanalysisofthefindingsofastandardizedpeerreviewprocess
AT kotkowskikevina emergencydepartmentpatientsafetyincidentcharacterizationanobservationalanalysisofthefindingsofastandardizedpeerreviewprocess
AT birdstevenb emergencydepartmentpatientsafetyincidentcharacterizationanobservationalanalysisofthefindingsofastandardizedpeerreviewprocess
AT arcemichaelw emergencydepartmentpatientsafetyincidentcharacterizationanobservationalanalysisofthefindingsofastandardizedpeerreviewprocess
AT volturogregorya emergencydepartmentpatientsafetyincidentcharacterizationanobservationalanalysisofthefindingsofastandardizedpeerreviewprocess
AT reznekmartina emergencydepartmentpatientsafetyincidentcharacterizationanobservationalanalysisofthefindingsofastandardizedpeerreviewprocess