Adverse events and comparison of systematic and voluntary reporting from a paediatric intensive care unit

BackgroundLittle is known of the incidence of adverse events in the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Perceived incidence may be dependent on data-collection methods.ObjectiveTo determine the incidence of adverse events by voluntary reporting and systematic enquiry.MethodsAdverse events in PICU...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMJ quality & safety 2010-12, Vol.19 (6), p.568-571
Hauptverfasser: Silas, Reshma, Tibballs, James
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 571
container_issue 6
container_start_page 568
container_title BMJ quality & safety
container_volume 19
creator Silas, Reshma
Tibballs, James
description BackgroundLittle is known of the incidence of adverse events in the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Perceived incidence may be dependent on data-collection methods.ObjectiveTo determine the incidence of adverse events by voluntary reporting and systematic enquiry.MethodsAdverse events in PICU were recorded contemporaneously by systematic enquiry with bedside nurses and attending doctors, and compared with data submitted voluntarily to the hospital's quality and safety unit. Events were classified as insignificant, minor, moderate, major and catastrophic or lethal, and assigned origins as medical/surgical diagnosis or management, medical/surgical procedures, medication or miscellaneous.ResultsAmong 740 patients, 524 adverse events (mean 0.71 per patient) occurred in 193 patients (26.1%). Systematic enquiry detected 405 (80%) among 165 patients and were classified by one investigator as insignificant 30 (7%); minor 100 (25%); moderate 160 (37%); major 103(25%) and catastrophic 12 (3%). The coefficient of agreement (kappa) of severity between the two investigators was 0.82 (95% CI 0.78–0.87). Voluntary reporting detected 166 (32%) adverse events among 100 patients, of which 119 were undetected by systematic reporting. Forty-nine events (9%) were detected by both methods. The number and severity of events reported by the two methods were significantly different (p
doi_str_mv 10.1136/qshc.2009.032979
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_815966448</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>4011909051</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b400t-1f8aea5fb0ca85040587fde3f777004029b4fab7955b58c162ed0b7853b8997a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1vFCEYxonR2A-9ezIkHjyYWWFmGODYbGxr21QP1XgjMPOirDswBWZj__uyTtuDF09Ant_7wfMg9IaSFaVN9_E2_epXNSFyRZpacvkMHdKWs6qRhD5_vAspDtBRShtCqKwlfYkOasIoZZIfIncy7CAmwLADnxPWfsB9GCcdXQoeB4vTXcow6uz6v-IubGefdbzDEaYQs_M_sY1hxBpPGgancyyk8xl8cjvAvY6AZ-_yK_TC6m2C1w_nMfp2-ulmfV5dfTn7vD65qkxLSK6oFRo0s4b0WjDSEia4HaCxnHNSnrU0rdWGS8YMEz3tahiI4YI1RkjJdXOM3i99pxhuZ0hZjS71sN1qD2FOSpSPd13bikK--4fchDn6spyinAtRd4K1hSIL1ceQUgSrpujGYoCiRO1TUPsU1D4FtaRQSt4-NJ7NCMNTwaPtBagWwBVv_zzpOv5WHW84U9ff1-rmB2NfL08v1FnhPyy8GTf_H38PVkShFA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1778826854</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Adverse events and comparison of systematic and voluntary reporting from a paediatric intensive care unit</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>BMJ Journals - NESLi2</source><creator>Silas, Reshma ; Tibballs, James</creator><creatorcontrib>Silas, Reshma ; Tibballs, James</creatorcontrib><description>BackgroundLittle is known of the incidence of adverse events in the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Perceived incidence may be dependent on data-collection methods.ObjectiveTo determine the incidence of adverse events by voluntary reporting and systematic enquiry.MethodsAdverse events in PICU were recorded contemporaneously by systematic enquiry with bedside nurses and attending doctors, and compared with data submitted voluntarily to the hospital's quality and safety unit. Events were classified as insignificant, minor, moderate, major and catastrophic or lethal, and assigned origins as medical/surgical diagnosis or management, medical/surgical procedures, medication or miscellaneous.ResultsAmong 740 patients, 524 adverse events (mean 0.71 per patient) occurred in 193 patients (26.1%). Systematic enquiry detected 405 (80%) among 165 patients and were classified by one investigator as insignificant 30 (7%); minor 100 (25%); moderate 160 (37%); major 103(25%) and catastrophic 12 (3%). The coefficient of agreement (kappa) of severity between the two investigators was 0.82 (95% CI 0.78–0.87). Voluntary reporting detected 166 (32%) adverse events among 100 patients, of which 119 were undetected by systematic reporting. Forty-nine events (9%) were detected by both methods. The number and severity of events reported by the two methods were significantly different (p&lt;0.0001). Voluntary reporting, mainly by nurses, did not capture major, severe or catastrophic events related to medical/surgical diagnosis or management.ConclusionsNeither voluntary reporting nor systematic enquiry captures all adverse events. While the two methods both capture some events, systematic reporting captures serious events, while voluntary reporting captures mainly insignificant and minor events.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1475-3898</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2044-5415</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1475-3901</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2044-5423</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2009.032979</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20511597</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adverse event ; Child ; Children &amp; youth ; Health administration ; Health care ; Hospitals ; Humans ; Infant ; Infant, Newborn ; Intensive care ; Intensive Care Units, Pediatric ; Mandatory Reporting ; Medical Errors ; Medical records ; Patient safety ; Pediatrics ; Studies ; Truth Disclosure ; Victoria</subject><ispartof>BMJ quality &amp; safety, 2010-12, Vol.19 (6), p.568-571</ispartof><rights>2010, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.</rights><rights>2010 2010, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b400t-1f8aea5fb0ca85040587fde3f777004029b4fab7955b58c162ed0b7853b8997a3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/19/6/568.full.pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/19/6/568.full$$EHTML$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>114,115,314,776,780,3183,23550,27901,27902,77342,77373</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20511597$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Silas, Reshma</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tibballs, James</creatorcontrib><title>Adverse events and comparison of systematic and voluntary reporting from a paediatric intensive care unit</title><title>BMJ quality &amp; safety</title><addtitle>Qual Saf Health Care</addtitle><description>BackgroundLittle is known of the incidence of adverse events in the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Perceived incidence may be dependent on data-collection methods.ObjectiveTo determine the incidence of adverse events by voluntary reporting and systematic enquiry.MethodsAdverse events in PICU were recorded contemporaneously by systematic enquiry with bedside nurses and attending doctors, and compared with data submitted voluntarily to the hospital's quality and safety unit. Events were classified as insignificant, minor, moderate, major and catastrophic or lethal, and assigned origins as medical/surgical diagnosis or management, medical/surgical procedures, medication or miscellaneous.ResultsAmong 740 patients, 524 adverse events (mean 0.71 per patient) occurred in 193 patients (26.1%). Systematic enquiry detected 405 (80%) among 165 patients and were classified by one investigator as insignificant 30 (7%); minor 100 (25%); moderate 160 (37%); major 103(25%) and catastrophic 12 (3%). The coefficient of agreement (kappa) of severity between the two investigators was 0.82 (95% CI 0.78–0.87). Voluntary reporting detected 166 (32%) adverse events among 100 patients, of which 119 were undetected by systematic reporting. Forty-nine events (9%) were detected by both methods. The number and severity of events reported by the two methods were significantly different (p&lt;0.0001). Voluntary reporting, mainly by nurses, did not capture major, severe or catastrophic events related to medical/surgical diagnosis or management.ConclusionsNeither voluntary reporting nor systematic enquiry captures all adverse events. While the two methods both capture some events, systematic reporting captures serious events, while voluntary reporting captures mainly insignificant and minor events.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adverse event</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Children &amp; youth</subject><subject>Health administration</subject><subject>Health care</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant</subject><subject>Infant, Newborn</subject><subject>Intensive care</subject><subject>Intensive Care Units, Pediatric</subject><subject>Mandatory Reporting</subject><subject>Medical Errors</subject><subject>Medical records</subject><subject>Patient safety</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Truth Disclosure</subject><subject>Victoria</subject><issn>1475-3898</issn><issn>2044-5415</issn><issn>1475-3901</issn><issn>2044-5423</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1vFCEYxonR2A-9ezIkHjyYWWFmGODYbGxr21QP1XgjMPOirDswBWZj__uyTtuDF09Ant_7wfMg9IaSFaVN9_E2_epXNSFyRZpacvkMHdKWs6qRhD5_vAspDtBRShtCqKwlfYkOasIoZZIfIncy7CAmwLADnxPWfsB9GCcdXQoeB4vTXcow6uz6v-IubGefdbzDEaYQs_M_sY1hxBpPGgancyyk8xl8cjvAvY6AZ-_yK_TC6m2C1w_nMfp2-ulmfV5dfTn7vD65qkxLSK6oFRo0s4b0WjDSEia4HaCxnHNSnrU0rdWGS8YMEz3tahiI4YI1RkjJdXOM3i99pxhuZ0hZjS71sN1qD2FOSpSPd13bikK--4fchDn6spyinAtRd4K1hSIL1ceQUgSrpujGYoCiRO1TUPsU1D4FtaRQSt4-NJ7NCMNTwaPtBagWwBVv_zzpOv5WHW84U9ff1-rmB2NfL08v1FnhPyy8GTf_H38PVkShFA</recordid><startdate>201012</startdate><enddate>201012</enddate><creator>Silas, Reshma</creator><creator>Tibballs, James</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201012</creationdate><title>Adverse events and comparison of systematic and voluntary reporting from a paediatric intensive care unit</title><author>Silas, Reshma ; Tibballs, James</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b400t-1f8aea5fb0ca85040587fde3f777004029b4fab7955b58c162ed0b7853b8997a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adverse event</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Children &amp; youth</topic><topic>Health administration</topic><topic>Health care</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant</topic><topic>Infant, Newborn</topic><topic>Intensive care</topic><topic>Intensive Care Units, Pediatric</topic><topic>Mandatory Reporting</topic><topic>Medical Errors</topic><topic>Medical records</topic><topic>Patient safety</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Truth Disclosure</topic><topic>Victoria</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Silas, Reshma</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tibballs, James</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>BMJ quality &amp; safety</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Silas, Reshma</au><au>Tibballs, James</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Adverse events and comparison of systematic and voluntary reporting from a paediatric intensive care unit</atitle><jtitle>BMJ quality &amp; safety</jtitle><addtitle>Qual Saf Health Care</addtitle><date>2010-12</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>568</spage><epage>571</epage><pages>568-571</pages><issn>1475-3898</issn><issn>2044-5415</issn><eissn>1475-3901</eissn><eissn>2044-5423</eissn><abstract>BackgroundLittle is known of the incidence of adverse events in the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Perceived incidence may be dependent on data-collection methods.ObjectiveTo determine the incidence of adverse events by voluntary reporting and systematic enquiry.MethodsAdverse events in PICU were recorded contemporaneously by systematic enquiry with bedside nurses and attending doctors, and compared with data submitted voluntarily to the hospital's quality and safety unit. Events were classified as insignificant, minor, moderate, major and catastrophic or lethal, and assigned origins as medical/surgical diagnosis or management, medical/surgical procedures, medication or miscellaneous.ResultsAmong 740 patients, 524 adverse events (mean 0.71 per patient) occurred in 193 patients (26.1%). Systematic enquiry detected 405 (80%) among 165 patients and were classified by one investigator as insignificant 30 (7%); minor 100 (25%); moderate 160 (37%); major 103(25%) and catastrophic 12 (3%). The coefficient of agreement (kappa) of severity between the two investigators was 0.82 (95% CI 0.78–0.87). Voluntary reporting detected 166 (32%) adverse events among 100 patients, of which 119 were undetected by systematic reporting. Forty-nine events (9%) were detected by both methods. The number and severity of events reported by the two methods were significantly different (p&lt;0.0001). Voluntary reporting, mainly by nurses, did not capture major, severe or catastrophic events related to medical/surgical diagnosis or management.ConclusionsNeither voluntary reporting nor systematic enquiry captures all adverse events. While the two methods both capture some events, systematic reporting captures serious events, while voluntary reporting captures mainly insignificant and minor events.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</pub><pmid>20511597</pmid><doi>10.1136/qshc.2009.032979</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1475-3898
ispartof BMJ quality & safety, 2010-12, Vol.19 (6), p.568-571
issn 1475-3898
2044-5415
1475-3901
2044-5423
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_815966448
source MEDLINE; BMJ Journals - NESLi2
subjects Adolescent
Adverse event
Child
Children & youth
Health administration
Health care
Hospitals
Humans
Infant
Infant, Newborn
Intensive care
Intensive Care Units, Pediatric
Mandatory Reporting
Medical Errors
Medical records
Patient safety
Pediatrics
Studies
Truth Disclosure
Victoria
title Adverse events and comparison of systematic and voluntary reporting from a paediatric intensive care unit
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-10T17%3A00%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Adverse%20events%20and%20comparison%20of%20systematic%20and%20voluntary%20reporting%20from%20a%20paediatric%20intensive%20care%20unit&rft.jtitle=BMJ%20quality%20&%20safety&rft.au=Silas,%20Reshma&rft.date=2010-12&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=568&rft.epage=571&rft.pages=568-571&rft.issn=1475-3898&rft.eissn=1475-3901&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/qshc.2009.032979&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E4011909051%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1778826854&rft_id=info:pmid/20511597&rfr_iscdi=true