Mullen Thomas, Nyflot Matthew, Zeng Jing, Jordan Loucille, Sponseller Patricia A, Carlson Joshua, Kane Gabrielle, Ford Eric C
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2016 Nov-Dec;6(6):429-435. doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2016.04.002. Epub 2016 Apr 15.
Tools for assessing the severity and risk of near-miss events in radiation oncology are few and needed. Recent work has described guidelines for the use of a 5-tier near-miss risk index (NMRI) for the classification of near-miss events. The purpose of this study was to assess the reliability of the NMRI among users in a radiation oncology department.
Reliability of the NMRI was assessed using an online survey distributed to members of a radiation oncology department. The survey contained 70 events extracted from the department's incident learning system (ILS). Survey participants rated each event using the NMRI guidelines, reported their attendance to weekly ILS meetings (used as a surrogate for familiarity with the ILS), and indicated their familiarity with the radiation oncology workflow. Interrater reliability was determined using Krippendorff's alpha. Use of the NMRI to rate actual events during 5 weekly ILS meetings was also assessed and interrater reliability determined.
Twenty-eight survey respondents represented a wide variety of care providers. Krippendorff's alpha was calculated for the whole respondent cohort to be 0.376, indicating fair agreement among raters. Respondents who had the most participation at ILS meetings (n = 4) had moderate agreement with an alpha of 0.501. Interestingly, there were significant differences in reliability and median NMRI scores between professions. NMRI use during weekly NMRI meetings (80 events rated), participants showed moderate reliability (alpha = 0.607).
Using the NMRI guidelines, raters from a wide variety of professions were able to assess the severity of near-miss incidents with fair agreement. Those experienced with the ILS showed better agreement, and higher agreement was seen during multidisciplinary ILS meetings. These data support the use the indices such as the NMRI for near-miss risk assessment in patient safety and prioritization of process improvements in radiation oncology.
用于评估放射肿瘤学中险些发生事件的严重程度和风险的工具很少且很有必要。最近的工作描述了使用5级险些发生风险指数(NMRI)对险些发生事件进行分类的指南。本研究的目的是评估放射肿瘤学部门的用户对NMRI的可靠性。
使用分发给放射肿瘤学部门成员的在线调查来评估NMRI的可靠性。该调查包含从部门事件学习系统(ILS)中提取的70个事件。调查参与者使用NMRI指南对每个事件进行评分,报告他们参加每周ILS会议的情况(用作熟悉ILS的替代指标),并表明他们对放射肿瘤学工作流程的熟悉程度。使用Krippendorff's alpha确定评分者间信度。还评估了在5次每周ILS会议期间使用NMRI对实际事件进行评分的情况,并确定评分者间信度。
28名调查受访者代表了各种各样的护理提供者。整个受访者队列的Krippendorff's alpha计算为0.376,表明评分者之间的一致性一般。在ILS会议上参与度最高的受访者(n = 4)一致性中等,alpha为0.501。有趣的是,不同职业之间在可靠性和NMRI中位数得分上存在显著差异。在每周的NMRI会议期间使用NMRI(对80个事件进行评分),参与者表现出中等可靠性(alpha = 0.607)。
使用NMRI指南,来自各种职业的评分者能够以合理的一致性评估险些发生事件的严重程度。那些熟悉ILS的人表现出更好的一致性,并且在多学科ILS会议期间一致性更高。这些数据支持使用诸如NMRI之类的指数进行患者安全中的险些发生风险评估以及放射肿瘤学中流程改进的优先级确定。