• 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

开展以儿童为中心的儿科医院伤害分析:一份质量改进报告。

Developing person-centred analysis of harm in a paediatric hospital: a quality improvement report.

作者信息

Lachman Peter, Linkson Lynette, Evans Trish, Clausen Henning, Hothi Daljit

机构信息

Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

出版信息

BMJ Qual Saf. 2015 May;24(5):337-44. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003795. Epub 2015 Mar 30.

DOI:10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003795
PMID:25825791
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4413734/
Abstract

The provision of safe care is complex and difficult to achieve. Awareness of what happens in real time is one of the ways to develop a safe system within a culture of safety. At Great Ormond Street Hospital, we developed and tested a tool specifically designed for patients and families to report harm, with the aim of raising awareness and opportunities for staff to continually improve and provide safe care. Over a 10-month period, we developed processes to report harm. We used the Model for Improvement and multiple Plan, Do, Study, Act cycles for testing. We measured changes using culture surveys as well as analysis of the reports. The tool was tested in different formats and moved from a provider centric to a person-centred tool analysed in real time. An independent person working with the families was best placed to support reporting. Immediate feedback to families was managed by senior staff, and provided the opportunity for clarification, transparency and apologies. Feedback to staff provided learning opportunities. Improvements in culture climate and staff reporting were noted in the short term. The integration of patient involvement in safety monitoring systems is essential to achieve safety. The high number of newly identified 'near-misses' and 'critical incidents' by families demonstrated an underestimation of potentially harmful events. This testing and introduction of a self-reporting, real-time bedside tool has led to active engagement with families and patients and raised situation awareness. We believe that this will lead to improved and safer care in the longer term.

摘要

提供安全护理是复杂且难以实现的。实时了解所发生的情况是在安全文化中建立安全系统的方法之一。在大奥蒙德街医院,我们开发并测试了一种专门为患者和家属设计的报告伤害的工具,目的是提高医护人员的意识,并为他们提供持续改进和提供安全护理的机会。在10个月的时间里,我们制定了报告伤害的流程。我们使用改进模型和多个计划-执行-研究-行动循环进行测试。我们通过文化调查以及对报告的分析来衡量变化。该工具以不同形式进行了测试,并从以提供者为中心的工具转变为实时分析的以人为本的工具。与家属合作的独立人员最适合支持报告工作。由高级工作人员向家属提供即时反馈,并提供澄清、透明和道歉的机会。向工作人员提供反馈则带来了学习机会。短期内注意到文化氛围和工作人员报告方面有所改善。让患者参与安全监测系统对于实现安全至关重要。家属新发现的大量“险些发生的事故”和“严重事件”表明,潜在有害事件被低估了。这种自我报告、实时床边工具的测试和引入促使家属和患者积极参与,并提高了态势感知。我们相信,从长远来看,这将带来更好、更安全的护理。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f7f2/4413734/a649bc848bcb/bmjqs-2014-003795f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f7f2/4413734/c9efd3753b34/bmjqs-2014-003795f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f7f2/4413734/ff77b087307a/bmjqs-2014-003795f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f7f2/4413734/a649bc848bcb/bmjqs-2014-003795f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f7f2/4413734/c9efd3753b34/bmjqs-2014-003795f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f7f2/4413734/ff77b087307a/bmjqs-2014-003795f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f7f2/4413734/a649bc848bcb/bmjqs-2014-003795f03.jpg

相似文献

1
Developing person-centred analysis of harm in a paediatric hospital: a quality improvement report.开展以儿童为中心的儿科医院伤害分析:一份质量改进报告。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2015 May;24(5):337-44. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003795. Epub 2015 Mar 30.
2
Can Patient Safety Incident Reports Be Used to Compare Hospital Safety? Results from a Quantitative Analysis of the English National Reporting and Learning System Data.患者安全事件报告能否用于比较医院安全性?对英国国家报告与学习系统数据的定量分析结果
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 9;10(12):e0144107. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0144107. eCollection 2015.
3
We Will Not Compete on Safety: How Children's Hospitals Have Come Together to Hasten Harm Reduction.我们不会在安全方面展开竞争:儿童医院如何携手加速减少伤害。
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2018 Jul;44(7):377-388. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2018.04.005. Epub 2018 Jun 6.
4
The patient experience of patient-centered communication with nurses in the hospital setting: a qualitative systematic review protocol.医院环境中患者与护士以患者为中心的沟通体验:一项定性系统评价方案
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):76-87. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1072.
5
Association Between Implementing Comprehensive Learning Collaborative Strategies in a Statewide Collaborative and Changes in Hospital Safety Culture.在全州协作中实施全面学习协作策略与医院安全文化变化之间的关联。
JAMA Surg. 2020 Oct 1;155(10):934-940. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2020.2842.
6
Critical Care Network in the State of Qatar.卡塔尔国重症监护网络。
Qatar Med J. 2019 Nov 7;2019(2):2. doi: 10.5339/qmj.2019.qccc.2. eCollection 2019.
7
Preventing Harm in the ICU-Building a Culture of Safety and Engaging Patients and Families.预防重症监护病房中的伤害——营造安全文化并让患者及家属参与其中
Crit Care Med. 2017 Sep;45(9):1531-1537. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002556.
8
National Quality Program Achieves Improvements in Safety Culture and Reduction in Preventable Harms in Community Hospitals.国家质量计划在社区医院实现了安全文化的改善和可预防伤害的减少。
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2018 Jul;44(7):389-400. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2018.04.008. Epub 2018 Jun 6.
9
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
10
Increasing Physician Reporting of Diagnostic Learning Opportunities.增加医师报告诊断学习机会。
Pediatrics. 2021 Jan;147(1). doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-2400. Epub 2020 Dec 2.

引用本文的文献

1
Coproducing data-driven organizational safety with patients: development and cognitive testing of a multisetting patient-reported safety concern tool.与患者共同生成数据驱动的组织安全:一种多场景患者报告安全问题工具的开发与认知测试
Int J Qual Health Care. 2025 Jul 4;37(3). doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzaf056.
2
Reconciling Safety and Safeguarding in Health and Social Care: Implications for Just Culture.协调健康与社会护理中的安全保障:对公正文化的影响。
Healthcare (Basel). 2025 Mar 21;13(7):690. doi: 10.3390/healthcare13070690.
3
Mapping Strategies for Strengthening Safety Culture: A Scoping Review.

本文引用的文献

1
Prevalence and severity of patient harm in a sample of UK-hospitalised children detected by the Paediatric Trigger Tool.通过儿科触发工具检测的英国住院儿童样本中患者伤害的发生率和严重程度。
BMJ Open. 2014 Jul 3;4(7):e005066. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005066.
2
Safety measurement and monitoring in healthcare: a framework to guide clinical teams and healthcare organisations in maintaining safety.医疗保健中的安全测量与监测:指导临床团队和医疗保健机构维护安全的框架。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2014 Aug;23(8):670-7. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002757. Epub 2014 Apr 24.
3
Comparison of a Trigger Tool and voluntary reporting to identify adverse events in a paediatric intensive care unit.
加强安全文化的映射策略:一项范围综述
Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Jun 13;12(12):1194. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12121194.
4
Family Input for Quality and Safety (FIQS): Using mobile technology for in-hospital reporting from families and patients.家庭参与医疗质量和安全(FIQS):利用移动技术进行院内来自家庭和患者的报告。
J Hosp Med. 2022 Jun;17(6):456-465. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2777. Epub 2022 Feb 4.
5
Do patient engagement interventions work for all patients? A systematic review and realist synthesis of interventions to enhance patient safety.患者参与干预措施对所有患者都有效吗?一项旨在增强患者安全的干预措施的系统评价和现实主义综合研究。
Health Expect. 2021 Dec;24(6):1905-1923. doi: 10.1111/hex.13343. Epub 2021 Aug 25.
6
Dimensions of safety culture: a systematic review of quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods for assessing safety culture in hospitals.安全文化的维度:系统综述评估医院安全文化的定量、定性和混合方法。
BMJ Open. 2021 Jul 27;11(7):e043982. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043982.
7
Psychometric properties of the Persian version of the Patient Measure of Safety (PMOS).患者安全测量量表(PMOS)波斯语版本的心理测量特性。
Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2019 Jul 23;33:73. doi: 10.34171/mjiri.33.73. eCollection 2019.
8
How might patient involvement in healthcare quality improvement efforts work-A realist literature review.患者如何参与医疗质量改进工作——一项现实主义文献综述。
Health Expect. 2019 Oct;22(5):952-964. doi: 10.1111/hex.12900. Epub 2019 May 1.
9
Measurement and monitoring of safety: impact and challenges of putting a conceptual framework into practice.安全的测量和监测:将概念框架付诸实践的影响和挑战。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2018 Oct;27(10):818-826. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007175. Epub 2018 Mar 6.
10
Parent-Reported Errors and Adverse Events in Hospitalized Children.家长报告的住院儿童错误和不良事件
JAMA Pediatr. 2016 Apr;170(4):e154608. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.4608. Epub 2016 Apr 4.
比较触发工具和自愿报告以识别儿科重症监护病房中的不良事件。
Anaesth Intensive Care. 2014 Mar;42(2):199-206. doi: 10.1177/0310057X1404200206.
4
Developing a reliable and valid patient measure of safety in hospitals (PMOS): a validation study.开发一种用于医院的可靠且有效的患者安全测量工具(PMOS):验证研究。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2014 Jul;23(7):565-73. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002312. Epub 2013 Dec 24.
5
Seeing it from both sides: do approaches to involving patients in improving their safety risk damaging the trust between patients and healthcare professionals? An interview study.从双方视角看问题:让患者参与改善其安全风险的方法是否会破坏患者与医疗保健专业人员之间的信任?一项访谈研究。
PLoS One. 2013 Nov 6;8(11):e80759. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0080759. eCollection 2013.
6
Developing a patient measure of safety (PMOS).开发患者安全度量(PMOS)。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2013 Jul;22(7):554-62. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-000843. Epub 2013 Feb 27.
7
What is the NHS Safety Thermometer?什么是国民保健服务安全温度计?
Clin Risk. 2012 Sep;18(5):163-169. doi: 10.1258/cr.2012.012038.
8
Can patients report patient safety incidents in a hospital setting? A systematic review.患者能否在医院环境中报告患者安全事件?系统评价。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2012 Aug;21(8):685-99. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000213. Epub 2012 May 5.
9
Development of an evidence-based framework of factors contributing to patient safety incidents in hospital settings: a systematic review.基于证据的医院环境中导致患者安全事件因素框架的制定:系统评价。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2012 May;21(5):369-80. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000443. Epub 2012 Mar 15.
10
Identification by families of pediatric adverse events and near misses overlooked by health care providers.医疗机构忽略的儿科不良事件和接近不良事件的家庭识别。
CMAJ. 2012 Jan 10;184(1):29-34. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.110393. Epub 2011 Nov 21.