• 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

糖尿病高危患者出院流程的风险评估

Risk assessment of the hospital discharge process of high-risk patients with diabetes.

作者信息

Pollack Teresa A, Illuri Vidhya, Khorzad Rebeca, Aleppo Grazia, Johnson Oakes Diana, Holl Jane L, Wallia Amisha

机构信息

Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism, and Molecular Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Center for Health Care Studies, Institute for Public Health and Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

出版信息

BMJ Open Qual. 2018 May 16;7(2):e000224. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2017-000224. eCollection 2018.

DOI:10.1136/bmjoq-2017-000224
PMID:29862328
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5976096/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Describe the application of a risk assessment to identify failures in the hospital discharge process of a high-risk patient group, liver transplant (LT) recipients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and/or hyperglycaemia who require high-risk medications.

DESIGN

A Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) of the hospital discharge process of LT recipients with DM and/or hyperglycaemia who required DM education and training before discharge was conducted using information from clinicians, patients and data extraction from the electronic health records (EHR). Failures and their causes were identified and the frequency and characteristics (harm, detectability) of each failure were assigned using a score of low/best (1) to high/worst (10); a Criticality Index (CI=Harm×Frequency) and a Risk Priority Number (RPN=Harm×Frequency×Detection) were also calculated.

SETTING

An academic, tertiary care centre in Chicago, Illinois.

PARTICIPANTS

Healthcare providers (N=31) including physicians (n= 6), advanced practice providers (n=12), nurses (n=6), pharmacists (n= 4), staff (n=3) and patients (n=6) and caregivers (n=3) participated in the FMECA; EHR data for LT recipients with DM or hyperglycaemia (N=100) were collected.

RESULTS

Of 78 identified failures, the most critical failures (n=15; RPNs=700, 630, 560; CI=70) were related to variability in delivery of diabetes education and training, care coordination and medication prescribing patterns of providers. Underlying causes included timing of patient education, lack of assessment of patients' knowledge and industry-level design failures of healthcare products (eg, EHR, insulin pen).

CONCLUSION

Most identified critical failures are preventable and suggest the need for the design of interventions, informed by the failures identified by this FMECA, to mitigate safety risks and improve outcomes of high-risk patient populations.

摘要

目的

描述风险评估在识别高危患者群体(患有糖尿病(DM)和/或高血糖且需要高风险药物治疗的肝移植(LT)受者)医院出院流程中的应用。

设计

利用临床医生、患者提供的信息以及从电子健康记录(EHR)中提取的数据,对出院前需要糖尿病教育和培训的患有DM和/或高血糖的LT受者的医院出院流程进行失效模式、影响及危害性分析(FMECA)。识别出失效及其原因,并使用从低/最佳(1)到高/最差(10)的分数对每个失效的频率和特征(危害、可检测性)进行赋值;还计算了临界指数(CI = 危害×频率)和风险优先数(RPN = 危害×频率×可检测性)。

地点

伊利诺伊州芝加哥的一家学术性三级医疗中心。

参与者

包括医生(n = 6)、高级执业提供者(n = 12)、护士(n = 6)、药剂师(n = 4)、工作人员(n = 3)的医疗保健提供者(N = 31)以及患者(n = 6)和护理人员(n = 3)参与了FMECA;收集了患有DM或高血糖的LT受者的EHR数据(N = 100)。

结果

在识别出的78个失效中,最关键的失效(n = 15;RPN分别为700、630、560;CI = 70)与糖尿病教育和培训的提供、护理协调以及提供者的药物处方模式的变异性有关。根本原因包括患者教育的时机、对患者知识的评估不足以及医疗保健产品(如EHR、胰岛素笔)的行业层面设计缺陷。

结论

大多数识别出的关键失效是可预防的,这表明需要根据此FMECA识别出的失效来设计干预措施,以降低安全风险并改善高危患者群体的治疗效果。

相似文献

1
Risk assessment of the hospital discharge process of high-risk patients with diabetes.糖尿病高危患者出院流程的风险评估
BMJ Open Qual. 2018 May 16;7(2):e000224. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2017-000224. eCollection 2018.
2
Operating room to intensive care unit handoffs and the risks of patient harm.手术室至重症监护病房的交接与患者伤害风险。
Surgery. 2015 Sep;158(3):588-94. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2015.03.061. Epub 2015 Jun 9.
3
FMECA Application to Intraoperative Electron Beam Radiotherapy Procedure As a Quality Method to Prevent and Reduce Patient's Risk in Conservative Surgery for Breast Cancer.故障模式、影响及危害性分析在术中电子束放射治疗程序中的应用:作为预防和降低乳腺癌保乳手术中患者风险的一种质量方法
Front Med (Lausanne). 2017 Aug 28;4:138. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2017.00138. eCollection 2017.
4
Application of Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis to the Medication-Use Process for Temperature-Sensitive Drugs in a University Hospital.失效模式与效应分析及危害性分析在某大学医院温度敏感药物用药流程中的应用
Can J Hosp Pharm. 2022 Jul 4;75(3):159-168. doi: 10.4212/cjhp.3121. eCollection 2022 Summer.
5
Prospective risk analysis and incident reporting for better pharmaceutical care at paediatric hospital discharge.儿科医院出院时为改善药学服务进行前瞻性风险分析和事件报告。
Int J Clin Pharm. 2014 Oct;36(5):953-62. doi: 10.1007/s11096-014-9977-y. Epub 2014 Jul 5.
6
Use of failure mode, effect and criticality analysis to improve safety in the medication administration process.运用失效模式、效应及危害性分析来提高用药过程的安全性。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2015 Aug;21(4):549-59. doi: 10.1111/jep.12314. Epub 2015 Apr 2.
7
Failure mode effect and criticality analysis of ultrasound device by classification tracking.基于分类跟踪的超声设备失效模式影响及危害性分析
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Apr 1;22(1):429. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-07843-4.
8
Risk assessment of the acute stroke diagnostic process using failure modes, effects, and criticality analysis.采用失效模式、影响和关键性分析评估急性脑卒中诊断流程的风险。
Acad Emerg Med. 2023 Mar;30(3):187-195. doi: 10.1111/acem.14648. Epub 2023 Jan 27.
9
Risk Assessment of the Door-In-Door-Out Process at Primary Stroke Centers for Patients With Acute Stroke Requiring Transfer to Comprehensive Stroke Centers.门到门流程在初级卒中中心的风险评估 急性卒中患者需要转至综合卒中中心。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Sep 21;10(18):e021803. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.121.021803. Epub 2021 Sep 17.
10
Use of a risk assessment method to improve the safety of negative pressure wound therapy.使用风险评估方法提高负压伤口治疗的安全性。
Int Wound J. 2014 Jun;11(3):253-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2012.01081.x. Epub 2012 Aug 30.

引用本文的文献

1
Leveraging User-Centered Design and Usability and Skills Testing for a Novel Diabetes Survival Skills Toolkit.利用以用户为中心的设计、可用性和技能测试来开发一种新型糖尿病生存技能工具包。
J Endocr Soc. 2025 Jun 24;9(9):bvaf111. doi: 10.1210/jendso/bvaf111. eCollection 2025 Sep.
2
Failure Mode Effects Analysis of Re-triage of Injured Patients to Receiving High-Level Illinois Trauma Centers.受伤患者重新分诊至伊利诺伊州高级创伤中心的失效模式影响分析。
Ann Surg. 2024 Oct 11. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006561.
3
Development and acceptability of a culturally competent skills and knowledge assessment tool for patients with diabetes mellitus.一种针对糖尿病患者的具有文化胜任力的技能和知识评估工具的开发与可接受性
J Clin Transl Endocrinol. 2024 Apr 25;36:100346. doi: 10.1016/j.jcte.2024.100346. eCollection 2024 Jun.
4
Defining obstacles to emergency transfer of trauma patients: An evaluation of retriage processes from nontrauma and lower-level Illinois trauma centers.定义创伤患者紧急转院的障碍:对伊利诺伊州非创伤和低级别创伤中心重新分类过程的评估。
Surgery. 2022 Dec;172(6):1860-1865. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2022.08.027. Epub 2022 Oct 1.
5
Risk Assessment of the Door-In-Door-Out Process at Primary Stroke Centers for Patients With Acute Stroke Requiring Transfer to Comprehensive Stroke Centers.门到门流程在初级卒中中心的风险评估 急性卒中患者需要转至综合卒中中心。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Sep 21;10(18):e021803. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.121.021803. Epub 2021 Sep 17.
6
Improving the quality of insulin prescribing for people with diabetes being discharged from hospital.提高糖尿病患者出院时胰岛素处方的质量。
BMJ Open Qual. 2019 Aug 24;8(3):e000655. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2019-000655. eCollection 2019.

本文引用的文献

1
Glycemic Control Reduces Infections in Post-Liver Transplant Patients: Results of a Prospective, Randomized Study.血糖控制可降低肝移植术后患者的感染率:一项前瞻性随机研究的结果
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017 Feb 1;102(2):451-459. doi: 10.1210/jc.2016-3279.
2
Hyperglycemia and Diabetes Mellitus Following Organ Transplantation.器官移植后的高血糖症与糖尿病
Curr Diab Rep. 2016 Feb;16(2):14. doi: 10.1007/s11892-015-0707-1.
3
Academic-Community Hospital Comparison of Vulnerabilities in Door-to-Needle Process for Acute Ischemic Stroke.学术型社区医院急性缺血性卒中门到针流程中的脆弱性比较
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2015 Oct;8(6 Suppl 3):S148-54. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.115.002085.
4
Electronic Health Record Vendor Adherence to Usability Certification Requirements and Testing Standards.电子健康记录供应商对可用性认证要求和测试标准的遵守情况。
JAMA. 2015 Sep 8;314(10):1070-1. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.8372.
5
Failure mode and effects analysis: a comparison of two common risk prioritisation methods.失效模式与效应分析:两种常见风险优先级排序方法的比较
BMJ Qual Saf. 2016 May;25(5):329-36. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004130. Epub 2015 Jul 13.
6
Transitions of care in heart failure: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association.心力衰竭的照护过渡:美国心脏协会的科学声明
Circ Heart Fail. 2015 Mar;8(2):384-409. doi: 10.1161/HHF.0000000000000006. Epub 2015 Jan 20.
7
Project ReEngineered Discharge (RED) lowers hospital readmissions of patients discharged from a skilled nursing facility.项目重新设计出院计划(RED)降低了从熟练护理机构出院的患者的医院再入院率。
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2013 Oct;14(10):736-40. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2013.03.004. Epub 2013 Apr 20.
8
Hospital-initiated transitional care interventions as a patient safety strategy: a systematic review.医院主导的过渡性护理干预作为一种患者安全策略:系统评价。
Ann Intern Med. 2013 Mar 5;158(5 Pt 2):433-40. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-5-201303051-00011.
9
In the Clinic. Transitions of care.临床实践。医疗护理的过渡。
Ann Intern Med. 2013 Mar 5;158(5 Pt 1):ITC3-1. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-5-201303050-01003.
10
Clinical service organisation for heart failure.心力衰竭的临床服务组织
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Sep 12(9):CD002752. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002752.pub3.