不利影响
患者安全
更安全的
医疗保健
医学
未遂事故
医疗急救
心理干预
质量管理
急诊医学
重症监护医学
护理部
业务
内科学
计算机安全
法律工程学
服务(商务)
营销
计算机科学
工程类
经济
经济增长
作者
David C. Classen,Roger K. Resar,Frances A. Griffin,Frank Federico,Terri Christensen Frankel,Nancy L. Kimmel,John Whittington,Allan Frankel,Andrew C. Seger,Brent C. James
出处
期刊:Health affairs Web exclusive
[Project Hope]
日期:2011-04-01
卷期号:30 (4): 581-589
被引量:1010
标识
DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0190
摘要
Identification and measurement of adverse medical events is central to patient safety, forming a foundation for accountability, prioritizing problems to work on, generating ideas for safer care, and testing which interventions work. We compared three methods to detect adverse events in hospitalized patients, using the same patient sample set from three leading hospitals. We found that the adverse event detection methods commonly used to track patient safety in the United States today-voluntary reporting and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Patient Safety Indicators-fared very poorly compared to other methods and missed 90 percent of the adverse events. The Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Global Trigger Tool found at least ten times more confirmed, serious events than these other methods. Overall, adverse events occurred in one-third of hospital admissions. Reliance on voluntary reporting and the Patient Safety Indicators could produce misleading conclusions about the current safety of care in the US health care system and misdirect efforts to improve patient safety.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI