Forster Alan J, Bernard Burnand, Drösler Saskia E, Gurevich Yana, Harrison James, Januel Jean-Marie, Romano Patrick S, Southern Danielle A, Sundararajan Vijaya, Quan Hude, Vanderloo Saskia E, Pincus Harold A, Ghali William A
The Ottawa Hospital, Civic Campus, 1053 Carling Avenue, Box 684, ASB-1 Room 1-008, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1Y 4E9.
Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, 501 Smyth Box 511, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1H 8L6.
Int J Qual Health Care. 2017 Aug 1;29(4):548-556. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzx070.
To assess the utility of the proposed World Health Organization (WHO)'s International Classification of Disease (ICD) framework for classifying patient safety events.
Independent classification of 45 clinical vignettes using a web-based platform.
The WHO's multi-disciplinary Quality and Safety Topic Advisory Group.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The framework consists of three concepts: harm, cause and mode. We defined a concept as 'classifiable' if more than half of the raters could assign an ICD-11 code for the case. We evaluated reasons why cases were nonclassifiable using a qualitative approach.
Harm was classifiable in 31 of 45 cases (69%). Of these, only 20 could be classified according to cause and mode. Classifiable cases were those in which a clear cause and effect relationship existed (e.g. medication administration error). Nonclassifiable cases were those without clear causal attribution (e.g. pressure ulcer). Of the 14 cases in which harm was not evident (31%), only 5 could be classified according to cause and mode and represented potential adverse events. Overall, nine cases (20%) were nonclassifiable using the three-part patient safety framework and contained significant ambiguity in the relationship between healthcare outcome and putative cause.
The proposed framework enabled classification of the majority of patient safety events. Cases in which potentially harmful events did not cause harm were not classifiable; additional code categories within the ICD-11 are one proposal to address this concern. Cases with ambiguity in cause and effect relationship between healthcare processes and outcomes remain difficult to classify.
评估世界卫生组织(WHO)提议的国际疾病分类(ICD)框架对患者安全事件进行分类的效用。
使用基于网络的平台对45个临床案例进行独立分类。
WHO的多学科质量与安全主题咨询小组。
该框架由三个概念组成:伤害、原因和方式。如果超过一半的评估者能够为案例分配ICD-11编码,我们就将一个概念定义为“可分类的”。我们采用定性方法评估案例不可分类的原因。
45个案例中有31个(69%)的伤害是可分类的。其中,只有20个案例能够根据原因和方式进行分类。可分类的案例是那些存在明确因果关系的案例(例如给药错误)。不可分类的案例是那些没有明确因果归属的案例(例如压疮)。在14个伤害不明显的案例(31%)中,只有5个案例能够根据原因和方式进行分类,并且代表潜在不良事件。总体而言,使用三部分患者安全框架有9个案例(20%)不可分类,并且在医疗结果与假定原因之间的关系上存在重大模糊性。
提议的框架能够对大多数患者安全事件进行分类。潜在有害事件未造成伤害的案例不可分类;ICD-11中的额外编码类别是解决这一问题的一项提议。医疗过程与结果之间因果关系存在模糊性的案例仍然难以分类。