Suppr超能文献

质量账户的质量:英格兰重大不良事件公开报告的透明度。一项半定量和定性审查。

Quality of Quality Accounts: transparency of public reporting of Never Events in England. A semi-quantitative and qualitative review.

作者信息

Wahid Nazurah Nn Abdul, Moppett Sarah H, Moppett Iain K

机构信息

University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK.

Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.

出版信息

J R Soc Med. 2016 May;109(5):190-9. doi: 10.1177/0141076816636367. Epub 2016 Mar 1.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To describe the quality of reporting and investigation into surgical Never Events in public reports.

DESIGN

Semi-quantitative and qualitative review of published Quality Accounts for three years (2011/2-2013/14). Data on Never Events were compared with previously collated Never Events rates. Quality of reported investigations was assessed using the London Protocol.

SETTING

English National Health Service.

PARTICIPANTS

All English acute hospital trusts.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Quality of Never Event reporting.

RESULTS

Quality Accounts were available for all Trusts for all three years, of which 342 referred to years when a surgical Never Event had occurred. A total of 125 of 342 (37%) accounts failed to report any or all Never Events that had occurred; 13/342 (4%) provided full disclosure; 197 (58%) reported that some investigation had taken place. Of these 197, 61 (31%) were limited in scope; 61 (31%) were categorised as detailed reports. Task and Technology factors were the commonest factor (103/211 (49%)) Identified in investigations, followed by Individual factors (48/211 (23%)). Team and Work environment factors were identified in 29/211 (14%) and 23/211 (11%), respectively. Organisational and Management 5/211 (2%) factors were rarely identified, and the Institutional context was never discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Reporting of Never Events and their investigations by English NHS Trusts in their Quality Accounts is neither consistently transparent nor adequate. As with clinical error, the true root causes are likely to be organisational rather than individual.

摘要

目的

描述公开报告中手术严重可避免事件的报告质量和调查情况。

设计

对三年(2011/2 - 2013/14)发布的质量报告进行半定量和定性审查。将严重可避免事件的数据与之前整理的严重可避免事件发生率进行比较。使用《伦敦议定书》评估报告调查的质量。

背景

英国国家医疗服务体系。

参与者

所有英国急性医院信托机构。

主要观察指标

严重可避免事件的报告质量。

结果

所有信托机构在这三年都有质量报告,其中342份涉及发生手术严重可避免事件的年份。342份报告中共有125份(37%)未报告任何或所有已发生的严重可避免事件;13份(4%)进行了全面披露;197份(58%)报告称已进行了一些调查。在这197份报告中,61份(31%)范围有限;61份(31%)被归类为详细报告。任务和技术因素是调查中最常发现的因素(211份中有103份(49%)),其次是个人因素(211份中有48份(23%))。团队和工作环境因素分别在211份中有29份(14%)和23份(11%)被发现。组织和管理因素在211份中仅有5份(2%)被发现,且从未讨论过机构背景。

结论

英国国民健康服务信托机构在其质量报告中对严重可避免事件及其调查的报告既不一致透明,也不充分。与临床错误一样,真正的根本原因可能是组织层面而非个人层面的。

相似文献

5
Wrong tooth extraction: further analysis of "never event" data.错误拔牙:“绝不允许发生的事件”数据的进一步分析
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019 Nov;57(9):932-934. doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2019.08.004. Epub 2019 Sep 10.
6
Wrong tooth extraction: an examination of 'Never Event' data.错误拔牙:对“严重可避免不良事件”数据的审查。
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Feb;55(2):187-188. doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2016.05.032. Epub 2016 Jun 17.
10

本文引用的文献

3
An organisation with a memory.一个有记忆的组织。
Clin Med (Lond). 2002 Sep-Oct;2(5):452-7. doi: 10.7861/clinmedicine.2-5-452.

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