Suppr超能文献

汉密尔顿急性疼痛服务安全研究:运用根本原因分析减少不良事件发生率。

Hamilton acute pain service safety study: using root cause analysis to reduce the incidence of adverse events.

机构信息

From the Department of Anesthesia (J.E.P., N.B., R.F.M., L.T., D.M., J.C.) and Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics (L.T.), McMaster University (K.A.), Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Acute Pain Service-NP, St. Joseph's Healthcare (K.A.), Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Clinical Practice and Education (M.K.), Hamilton Health Sciences (D.B., M.M.), Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Advisor Health System Transformation, Hamilton Niagara Haldimand Brant Local Health Integration Network (R.F.), Grimsby, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Anesthesiology. 2014 Jan;120(1):97-109. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3182a76f59.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although intravenous patient-controlled analgesia opioids and epidural analgesia offer improved analgesia for postoperative patients treated on an acute pain service, these modalities also expose patients to some risk of serious morbidity and even mortality. Root cause analysis, a process for identifying the causal factor(s) that underlie an adverse event, has the potential to identify and address system issues and thereby decrease the chance of recurrence of these complications.

METHODS

This study was designed to compare the incidence of adverse events on an acute pain service in three hospitals, before and after the introduction of a formal root cause analysis process. The "before" cohort included all patients with pain from February 2002 to July 2007. The "after" cohort included all patients with pain from January 2009 to December 2009.

RESULTS

A total of 35,384 patients were tracked over the 7 yr of this study. The after cohort showed significant reductions in the overall event rate (1.47 vs. 2.35% or 1 in 68 vs. 1 in 42, the rate of respiratory depression (0.41 vs. 0.71%), the rate of severe hypotension (0.78 vs. 1.34%), and the rate of patient-controlled analgesia pump programming errors (0.0 vs. 0.08%). Associated with these results, the incidence of severe pain increased from 6.5 to 10.5%. To achieve these results, 26 unique recommendations were made of which 23 being completed, 1 in progress, and 2 not completed.

CONCLUSIONS

Formal root cause analysis was associated with an improvement in the safety of patients on a pain service. The process was effective in giving credibility to recommendations, but addressing all the action plans proved difficult with available resources.

摘要

背景

虽然静脉患者自控镇痛阿片类药物和硬膜外镇痛为在急性疼痛服务中治疗的术后患者提供了更好的镇痛效果,但这些方法也使患者面临一些严重发病率甚至死亡率的风险。根本原因分析是一种识别导致不良事件的因果因素的过程,它具有识别和解决系统问题的潜力,从而降低这些并发症再次发生的可能性。

方法

本研究旨在比较在三家医院的急性疼痛服务中引入正式根本原因分析流程前后不良事件的发生率。“前”队列包括所有 2002 年 2 月至 2007 年 7 月有疼痛的患者。“后”队列包括所有 2009 年 1 月至 2009 年 12 月有疼痛的患者。

结果

在这项研究的 7 年中,共跟踪了 35384 名患者。后队列显示总体事件发生率显著降低(1.47%对 2.35%,即每 68 例 1 例对每 42 例 1 例,呼吸抑制发生率(0.41%对 0.71%),严重低血压发生率(0.78%对 1.34%)和患者自控镇痛泵编程错误发生率(0.0%对 0.08%)。与这些结果相关的是,严重疼痛的发生率从 6.5%增加到 10.5%。为了实现这些结果,共提出了 26 条独特的建议,其中 23 条已完成,1 条正在进行中,2 条未完成。

结论

正式的根本原因分析与提高疼痛服务患者的安全性相关。该流程有效地为建议提供了可信度,但在现有资源的情况下,解决所有行动计划都具有挑战性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验