Suppr超能文献

量化源于牙科诊所的不良事件:牙科实践研究方法。

Quantifying Dental Office-Originating Adverse Events: The Dental Practice Study Methods.

机构信息

From the Department of Oral Health Policy and Epidemiology, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston Massachusetts.

School of Dentistry, University of Texas at Houston, Health Science Center, Houston, Texas.

出版信息

J Patient Saf. 2021 Dec 1;17(8):e1080-e1087. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000444.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Preventable medical errors in hospital settings are the third leading cause of deaths in the United States. However, less is known about harm that occurs in patients in outpatient settings, where the majority of care is delivered. We do not know the likelihood that a patient sitting in a dentist chair will experience harm. Additionally, we do not know if patients of certain race, age, sex, or socioeconomic status disproportionately experience iatrogenic harm.

METHODS

We initiated the Dental Practice Study (DPS) with the aim of determining the frequency and types of adverse events (AEs) that occur in dentistry on the basis of retrospective chart audit. This article discusses the 6-month pilot phase of the DPS during which we explored the feasibility and efficiency of our multistaged review process to detect AEs.

RESULTS

At sites 1, 2, and 3, respectively, 2 reviewers abstracted 21, 11, and 23 probable AEs, respectively, from the 100 patient charts audited per site. At site 2, a third reviewer audited the same 100 charts and found only 1 additional probable AE. Of the total 56 probable AEs (from 300 charts), the expert panel confirmed 9 AE cases. This equals 3 AEs per 100 patients per year. Patients who experienced an AE tended to be male and older and to have undergone more procedures within the study year.

CONCLUSIONS

This article presents an overview of the DPS. It describes the methods used and summarizes the results of its pilot phase. To minimize threats to dental patient safety, a starting point is to understand their basic epidemiology, both in terms of their frequency and the extent to which they affect different populations.

摘要

背景

在美国,可预防的医疗失误是导致死亡的第三大原因。然而,人们对门诊环境中发生的伤害知之甚少,而大部分医疗服务都是在门诊环境中提供的。我们不知道坐在牙医椅上的患者发生伤害的可能性有多大。此外,我们也不知道是否某些种族、年龄、性别或社会经济地位的患者不成比例地经历医源性伤害。

方法

我们启动了牙科实践研究(DPS),旨在根据回顾性图表审查确定牙科中发生不良事件(AE)的频率和类型。本文讨论了 DPS 的 6 个月试点阶段,在此期间,我们探讨了我们的多阶段审查过程检测 AE 的可行性和效率。

结果

在站点 1、2 和 3,分别有 2 位评审员从每个站点审查的 100 份患者图表中提取了 21、11 和 23 份可能的 AE。在站点 2,第三位评审员审查了相同的 100 份图表,仅发现了另外 1 份可能的 AE。在总共 56 份可能的 AE(来自 300 份图表)中,专家小组确认了 9 例 AE 病例。这相当于每 100 名患者每年发生 3 例 AE。发生 AE 的患者往往是男性和老年人,并且在研究年内接受了更多的治疗。

结论

本文概述了 DPS。它描述了所使用的方法,并总结了其试点阶段的结果。为了最大限度地减少牙科患者安全受到的威胁,首先要了解他们的基本流行病学,包括发生频率以及它们对不同人群的影响程度。

相似文献

1
Quantifying Dental Office-Originating Adverse Events: The Dental Practice Study Methods.
J Patient Saf. 2021 Dec 1;17(8):e1080-e1087. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000444.
2
The Nature of Adverse Events in Dentistry.
J Patient Saf. 2024 Oct 1;20(7):454-460. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000001255. Epub 2024 Jul 31.
3
Feasibility of Electronic Health Record-Based Triggers in Detecting Dental Adverse Events.
Appl Clin Inform. 2018 Jul;9(3):646-653. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1668088. Epub 2018 Aug 22.
4
Classifying Adverse Events in the Dental Office.
J Patient Saf. 2021 Sep 1;17(6):e540-e556. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000407.
5
An adverse event trigger tool in dentistry: a new methodology for measuring harm in the dental office.
J Am Dent Assoc. 2013 Jul;144(7):808-14. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2013.0191.
6
Assessing adverse events among home care clients in three Canadian provinces using chart review.
BMJ Qual Saf. 2013 Dec;22(12):989-97. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002039. Epub 2013 Jul 4.
7
Preventable and mitigable adverse events in cancer care: Measuring risk and harm across the continuum.
Cancer. 2017 Dec 1;123(23):4728-4736. doi: 10.1002/cncr.30916. Epub 2017 Aug 17.
8
The incidence of adverse events among home care patients.
Int J Qual Health Care. 2013 Feb;25(1):16-28. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzs075. Epub 2013 Jan 2.

引用本文的文献

1
A scoping review of patient safety checklists in dentistry.
Clin Oral Investig. 2024 Oct 18;28(11):603. doi: 10.1007/s00784-024-05996-6.
4
Understanding patient safety in dentistry: evaluating the present and envisioning the future-a narrative review.
BMJ Open Qual. 2024 May 7;13(Suppl 2):e002502. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002502.
6
Dentists are humans too - education in human factors within dental care.
Br Dent J. 2018 Jun 8;224(11):901-904. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.438.

本文引用的文献

1
National Health Spending: Faster Growth In 2015 As Coverage Expands And Utilization Increases.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2017 Jan 1;36(1):166-176. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2016.1330. Epub 2016 Dec 2.
2
Estimating deaths due to medical error: the ongoing controversy and why it matters.
BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 May;26(5):423-428. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2016-006144. Epub 2016 Oct 12.
3
How dental team members describe adverse events.
J Am Dent Assoc. 2016 Oct;147(10):803-11. doi: 10.1016/j.adaj.2016.04.015. Epub 2016 Jun 3.
4
Medical error-the third leading cause of death in the US.
BMJ. 2016 May 3;353:i2139. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i2139.
5
Measuring up: Implementing a dental quality measure in the electronic health record context.
J Am Dent Assoc. 2016 Jan;147(1):35-40. doi: 10.1016/j.adaj.2015.06.023. Epub 2015 Nov 6.
7
Lessons learned from dental patient safety case reports.
J Am Dent Assoc. 2015 May;146(5):318-26.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.adaj.2015.01.003.
8
Case studies of patient safety research classics to build research capacity in low- and middle-income countries.
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2013 Dec;39(12):553-60. doi: 10.1016/s1553-7250(13)39071-0.
9
10
Patient safety incidents reported by Finnish dentists; results from an internet-based survey.
Acta Odontol Scand. 2013 Nov;71(6):1370-7. doi: 10.3109/00016357.2013.764005. Epub 2013 Jan 28.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验