Reznek Martin A, Barton Bruce A
Department of Emergency Medicine (MAR) and Department of Quantitative Health Sciences (BAB), University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 Lake Avenue, Worcester, MA 01655, USA.
Int J Qual Health Care. 2014 Jun;26(3):278-86. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzu045. Epub 2014 Apr 25.
Incident reporting is an important component of health care quality improvement. The objective of this investigation was to evaluate the effectiveness of an emergency department (ED) peer review process in promoting incident reporting.
An observational, interrupted time-series analysis of health care provider (HCP) incident reporting to the ED during a 30-month study period prior to and following the peer review process implementation and a survey-based assessment of physician perceptions of the peer review process' educational value and its effectiveness in identifying errors.
Large, urban, academic ED.
HCPs were invited to participate in a standardized, non-punitive, non-anonymous peer review process that involved analysis and structured discussion of incident reports submitted to ED physician leadership.
Monthly frequency of incident reporting by HCPs and physician perceptions of the peer review process.
HCPs submitted 314 incident reports to the ED over the study period. Following the intervention, frequency of reporting by HCPs within the hospital increased over time. The frequencies of self-reporting, reporting by other ED practitioners and reporting by non-ED practitioners within the hospital increased compared with a control group of outside HCPs (P = 0.0019, P = 0.0025 and P < 0.0001). Physicians perceived the peer review process to be educational and highly effective in identifying errors.
The implementation of a non-punitive peer review process that provides timely feedback and is perceived as being valuable for error identification and education can lead to increased incident reporting by HCPs.
事件报告是医疗质量改进的重要组成部分。本调查的目的是评估急诊科同行评审流程在促进事件报告方面的有效性。
在同行评审流程实施之前和之后的30个月研究期内,对向急诊科报告事件的医疗服务提供者(HCP)进行观察性、中断时间序列分析,并基于调查评估医生对同行评审流程教育价值及其识别错误有效性的看法。
大型城市学术急诊科。
邀请HCP参与标准化、非惩罚性、非匿名的同行评审流程,该流程包括对提交给急诊科医生领导层的事件报告进行分析和结构化讨论。
HCP每月报告事件的频率以及医生对同行评审流程的看法。
在研究期间,HCP向急诊科提交了314份事件报告。干预后,医院内HCP的报告频率随时间增加。与外部HCP对照组相比,医院内自我报告、其他急诊科从业者报告和非急诊科从业者报告的频率均有所增加(P = 0.0019,P = 0.0025,P < 0.0001)。医生认为同行评审流程具有教育意义,且在识别错误方面非常有效。
实施提供及时反馈且被认为对错误识别和教育有价值的非惩罚性同行评审流程,可导致HCP增加事件报告。