• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

使用全球触发工具测量儿科住院患者的不良事件和伤害程度。

Measuring adverse events and levels of harm in pediatric inpatients with the Global Trigger Tool.

机构信息

Division of Hospital Medicine, Medical Director of Clinical Decision Support, Information Services, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio 45229, USA.

出版信息

Pediatrics. 2012 Nov;130(5):e1206-14. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-0179. Epub 2012 Oct 8.

DOI:10.1542/peds.2012-0179
PMID:23045558
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and characterize the Global Trigger Tool's (GTT's) utility in a pediatric population; to measure the rate of harm at our institution and compare it with previously established trigger tools and benchmark rates; and to describe the distribution of harm of the detected events.

METHODS

Per the GTT methodology, 240 random inpatient charts were retrospectively reviewed over a 12-month pilot period for the presence of 53 predefined safety triggers. When triggers were detected, the reviewers investigated the chart more thoroughly to decide whether an adverse event occurred. Agreement with a physician reviewer was then reached, and a level of harm was assigned.

RESULTS

A total of 404 triggers were detected (1.7 triggers per patient), and 88 adverse events were identified. Rates of 36.7 adverse events per 100 admissions and 76.3 adverse events per 1000 patient-days were calculated. Sixty-two patients (25.8%) had at least 1 adverse event during their hospitalization, and 18 (7.5%) had >1 event identified. Three-quarters of the events were category E (temporary harm). Two events required intervention to sustain life (category H). Two of the 6 trigger modules identified 95% of the adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The GTT demonstrated utility in the pediatric inpatient setting. With the use of the trigger tool, we identified a rate of harm 2 to 3 times higher than previously published pediatric rates. Modifications to the trigger tool to address pediatric-specific issues could increase the test characteristics of the tool.

摘要

目的

评估和描述全球触发工具(Global Trigger Tool,GTT)在儿科人群中的实用性;测量本机构的伤害发生率,并与先前建立的触发工具和基准率进行比较;描述已检测到的事件伤害分布情况。

方法

根据 GTT 方法,在为期 12 个月的试点期间,回顾性地对 240 份随机住院病历进行了审查,以查找 53 个预先确定的安全触发因素。当发现触发因素时,审查员会更深入地检查病历,以确定是否发生不良事件。然后与一名医师审查员达成一致,并确定伤害级别。

结果

共发现 404 个触发因素(每个患者 1.7 个),确定了 88 个不良事件。计算出每 100 例住院患者中有 36.7 例不良事件和每 1000 例患者中有 76.3 例不良事件的发生率。62 名患者(25.8%)在住院期间至少发生了 1 次不良事件,18 名患者(7.5%)发生了 >1 次事件。事件的四分之三为 E 类(暂时伤害)。有 2 个事件需要干预以维持生命(H 类)。6 个触发模块中的 2 个模块识别出了 95%的不良事件。

结论

GTT 在儿科住院环境中具有实用性。使用触发工具,我们确定的伤害发生率比以前发表的儿科发生率高 2 至 3 倍。对触发工具进行修改以解决儿科特定问题可以提高工具的测试特性。

相似文献

1
Measuring adverse events and levels of harm in pediatric inpatients with the Global Trigger Tool.使用全球触发工具测量儿科住院患者的不良事件和伤害程度。
Pediatrics. 2012 Nov;130(5):e1206-14. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-0179. Epub 2012 Oct 8.
2
Development, testing, and findings of a pediatric-focused trigger tool to identify medication-related harm in US children's hospitals.一种以儿科为重点的触发工具在美国儿童医院中识别与药物相关伤害的开发、测试及结果
Pediatrics. 2008 Apr;121(4):e927-35. doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-1779.
3
Adverse events in the neonatal intensive care unit: development, testing, and findings of an NICU-focused trigger tool to identify harm in North American NICUs.新生儿重症监护病房的不良事件:一种以北美新生儿重症监护病房为重点、用于识别伤害的触发工具的开发、测试及结果
Pediatrics. 2006 Oct;118(4):1332-40. doi: 10.1542/peds.2006-0565.
4
Performance of the adverse drug event trigger tool and the global trigger tool for identifying adverse drug events: experience in a Belgian hospital.不良药物事件触发工具和全球触发工具在识别不良药物事件中的性能:比利时一家医院的经验。
Ann Pharmacother. 2013 Nov;47(11):1414-9. doi: 10.1177/1060028013500939.
5
The Adverse Drug Event Collaborative: a joint venture to measure medication-related patient harm.药物不良事件协作组:一项衡量与药物相关的患者伤害的联合项目。
N Z Med J. 2012 Jan 25;126(1368):9-20.
6
The Global Trigger Tool shows that one out of seven patients suffers harm in Palestinian hospitals: challenges for launching a strategic safety plan.全球触发工具显示,七分之一的患者在巴勒斯坦医院遭受伤害:启动战略安全计划面临的挑战。
Int J Qual Health Care. 2013 Dec;25(6):640-7. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzt066. Epub 2013 Oct 17.
7
Reevaluating the safety profile of pediatrics: a comparison of computerized adverse drug event surveillance and voluntary reporting in the pediatric environment.重新评估儿科用药安全性:儿科环境中计算机化药物不良事件监测与自愿报告的比较。
Pediatrics. 2008 May;121(5):e1201-7. doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-2609.
8
A trigger tool to detect harm in pediatric inpatient settings.一种用于检测儿科住院环境中伤害的触发工具。
Pediatrics. 2015 Jun;135(6):1036-42. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-2152. Epub 2015 May 18.
9
Assessment of the global trigger tool to measure, monitor and evaluate patient safety in cancer patients: reliability concerns are raised.评估全球触发工具以衡量、监测和评估癌症患者的患者安全:可靠性令人担忧。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2013 Jul;22(7):571-9. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001219. Epub 2013 Feb 27.
10
Safety on an inpatient pediatric otolaryngology service: many small errors, few adverse events.儿科耳鼻喉科住院服务的安全性:小差错众多,不良事件较少。
Laryngoscope. 2009 May;119(5):871-9. doi: 10.1002/lary.20208.

引用本文的文献

1
Active surveillance of adverse drug events in hospitalized patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension based on the global trigger tool.基于全球触发工具对住院肺动脉高压患者药物不良事件进行主动监测。
Front Pharmacol. 2025 Aug 14;16:1533634. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2025.1533634. eCollection 2025.
2
Trigger tools in healthcare settings: insights from an umbrella review.医疗环境中的触发工具:综合综述的见解
BMJ Open Qual. 2025 Jul 5;14(3):e003119. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2024-003119.
3
Broadening the definition of patient-safety events: lessons from a multicentre learning health system collaborative.
拓宽患者安全事件的定义:来自多中心学习型健康系统合作项目的经验教训
BMJ Open Qual. 2025 Feb 19;14(1):e002988. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002988.
4
Improving Safety through a Virtual Learning Collaborative.通过虚拟学习协作提高安全性。
Pediatr Qual Saf. 2024 Jul 19;9(4):e740. doi: 10.1097/pq9.0000000000000740. eCollection 2024 Jul-Aug.
5
Adverse Events in Pediatric Inpatients: The Japan Adverse Event Study.儿科住院患者中的不良事件:日本不良事件研究。
J Patient Saf. 2024 Jan 1;20(1):38-44. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000001180. Epub 2023 Nov 6.
6
Incidence and characteristics of adverse events in paediatric inpatient care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.儿科住院患者不良事件的发生率和特征:系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2023 Mar;32(3):133-149. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2022-015298. Epub 2022 Dec 26.
7
Developing a trigger tool to monitor adverse events during haemodialysis in children: a pilot project.开发一种触发工具以监测儿童血液透析期间的不良事件:一个试点项目。
Pediatr Nephrol. 2023 Apr;38(4):1233-1240. doi: 10.1007/s00467-022-05673-4. Epub 2022 Aug 1.
8
Improving Shared Situation Awareness for High-risk Therapies in Hospitalized Children.提高住院儿童高危治疗中的共享情境感知
Hosp Pediatr. 2022 Jan 1;12(1):37-46. doi: 10.1542/hpeds.2021-006193.
9
Inequities in quality and safety outcomes for hospitalized children with intellectual disability.住院智障儿童在医疗质量和安全结果方面的不平等现象。
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2022 Mar;64(3):314-322. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.15066. Epub 2021 Sep 25.
10
Body Mass Index Category and Adverse Events in Hospitalized Children.体重指数类别与住院儿童不良事件。
Acad Pediatr. 2022 Jul;22(5):747-753. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2021.09.004. Epub 2021 Sep 17.