Connecting perspectives on quality and safety: patient-level linkage of incident, adverse event and complaint data.


Journal

BMJ quality & safety
ISSN: 2044-5423
Titre abrégé: BMJ Qual Saf
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101546984

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
03 2019
Historique:
received: 03 10 2017
revised: 02 06 2018
accepted: 19 06 2018
pubmed: 23 7 2018
medline: 30 1 2020
entrez: 23 7 2018
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Incident, adverse event (AE) and complaint data are typically used separately, but may be related at the patient level with one event triggering a cascade of events, ultimately resulting in a complaint. This study examined relations between incidents, AEs and complaints that co-occurred in admissions. Independently and routinely collected incident, AE and complaint data were retrospectively linked for surgical admissions in an academic centre (2008-2014). Two investigators reviewed whether incidents/AEs in admissions were clinically related and in what sequence (incident preceding vs following AE). Likelihood of occurrence of AEs and AE cascades (ie, ≥3 AEs) was studied using logistic regression analyses. Complaints were filed for 33 (0.1%) of 26 383 admissions. Complaints filed by patients with incidents and/or AEs (n=13) mostly addressed quality/safety problems, whereas other complaints mostly addressed relationship problems. Incidents and AEs co-occurred in 730 (2.8%) admissions, which seemed clinically related in 34% of these cases. Incidents with related AEs preceded as well as followed AEs (56.6%/44.4%). Patients with incidents were at greater risk of AEs than patients without incidents, even for seemingly unrelated AEs (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.3 to 1.6). Risk of AE cascades was greater when patients with AEs also had incidents, regardless of whether these seemed related (unrelated: OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.6 to 2.5; related: OR 5.7; 95% CI 4.3 to 7.4) or whether incidents preceded or followed AEs in these admissions (53% vs 52%, P>0.05). Patient-level linkage of incident, AE and complaint data can reveal relations between events that otherwise remain obscured, such as incidents that trigger as well as follow AEs, introducing event cascades, regardless of whether clinical relations seem present.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Incident, adverse event (AE) and complaint data are typically used separately, but may be related at the patient level with one event triggering a cascade of events, ultimately resulting in a complaint. This study examined relations between incidents, AEs and complaints that co-occurred in admissions.
METHODS
Independently and routinely collected incident, AE and complaint data were retrospectively linked for surgical admissions in an academic centre (2008-2014). Two investigators reviewed whether incidents/AEs in admissions were clinically related and in what sequence (incident preceding vs following AE). Likelihood of occurrence of AEs and AE cascades (ie, ≥3 AEs) was studied using logistic regression analyses.
RESULTS
Complaints were filed for 33 (0.1%) of 26 383 admissions. Complaints filed by patients with incidents and/or AEs (n=13) mostly addressed quality/safety problems, whereas other complaints mostly addressed relationship problems. Incidents and AEs co-occurred in 730 (2.8%) admissions, which seemed clinically related in 34% of these cases. Incidents with related AEs preceded as well as followed AEs (56.6%/44.4%). Patients with incidents were at greater risk of AEs than patients without incidents, even for seemingly unrelated AEs (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.3 to 1.6). Risk of AE cascades was greater when patients with AEs also had incidents, regardless of whether these seemed related (unrelated: OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.6 to 2.5; related: OR 5.7; 95% CI 4.3 to 7.4) or whether incidents preceded or followed AEs in these admissions (53% vs 52%, P>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Patient-level linkage of incident, AE and complaint data can reveal relations between events that otherwise remain obscured, such as incidents that trigger as well as follow AEs, introducing event cascades, regardless of whether clinical relations seem present.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30032125
pii: bmjqs-2017-007457
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007457
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Pagination

180-189

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: None declared.

Auteurs

Marit S de Vos (MS)

Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Jaap F Hamming (JF)

Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Jolanda J C Chua-Hendriks (JJC)

Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Perla J Marang-van de Mheen (PJ)

Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH