Differences between serious and nonserious patient safety incidents in the largest hospital district in Finland

Objectives To determine if and in what ways serious patient safety incidents differ from nonserious patient safety incidents. Methods Statistical analysis was performed on patient safety incident reports that were reported in 2015 in Finland's largest hospital district (Helsinki and Uusimaa, HU...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of healthcare risk management 2018-10, Vol.38 (2), p.27-35
Hauptverfasser: Jämsä, Juho Olavi, Palojoki, Sari Hannele, Lehtonen, Lasse, Tapper, Anna‐Maija
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objectives To determine if and in what ways serious patient safety incidents differ from nonserious patient safety incidents. Methods Statistical analysis was performed on patient safety incident reports that were reported in 2015 in Finland's largest hospital district (Helsinki and Uusimaa, HUS). Reports were divided into two groups: nonserious incidents and serious incidents. Differences between groups were studied from several types of categorically divided information. Results Of the total number of reports (15,863), 1% were serious incidents (175). Serious and nonserious incidents differed significantly from each other. Serious incidents concerning laboratory, imaging, or medical equipment were more common. On the other hand, incidents concerning medication, infusion, and blood transfusion were less frequent. In serious incidents, the proportion of doctors reporting was greater, and contributing factors were better recognized, the most common being working of procedures. Conclusions In the future, special attention should be given to the particular aspects of serious patient safety incidents, such as safe use of medical equipment, training, and handling of procedures. Root cause analysis is an effective way to handle serious incidents and enables the prevention of their reoccurrence. However, a systematic follow‐up of the root cause analysis should be developed.
ISSN:1074-4797
2040-0861
DOI:10.1002/jhrm.21310