Rahman Jabin Md Shafiqur, Steen Mary, Wepa Dianne, Bergman Patrick
Department of Medicine and Optometry, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden.
Faculty of Health Studies, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK.
Digit Health. 2023 May 8;9:20552076231174307. doi: 10.1177/20552076231174307. eCollection 2023 Jan-Dec.
This study explored healthcare quality issues affecting the reporting and investigation levels of digital incident reporting systems.
A total of 38 health information technology-related incident reports (free-text narratives) were collected from one of Sweden's national incident reporting repositories. The incidents were analysed using an existing framework, i.e., the Health Information Technology Classification System, to identify the types of issues and consequences. The framework was applied in two fields, 'event description' by the reporters and 'manufacturer's measures', to assess the quality of reporting incidents by the reporters. Additionally, the contributing factors, i.e., either human or technical factors for both fields, were identified to evaluate the quality of the reported incidents.
Five types of issues were identified and changes made between before-and-after investigations: Machine to software-related issues ( = 8), machine to use-related issues ( = 5), software to software-related issues ( = 5), use to software-related issues ( = 4) and use to use-related issues ( = 1). Over two-thirds ( = 15) of the incidents demonstrated a change in the contributing factors after the investigation. Only four incidents were identified as altering the consequences after the investigation.
This study shed some light on the issues of incident reporting and the gap between the reporting and investigation levels. Facilitating sufficient staff training sessions, agreeing on common terms for health information technology systems, refining the existing classifications systems, enforcing mini-root cause analysis, and ensuring unit-based local reporting and standard national reporting may help bridge the gap between reporting and investigation levels in digital incident reporting.
本研究探讨了影响数字事件报告系统报告和调查水平的医疗质量问题。
从瑞典国家事件报告库之一收集了38份与健康信息技术相关的事件报告(自由文本叙述)。使用现有的框架,即健康信息技术分类系统,对这些事件进行分析,以确定问题类型和后果。该框架应用于两个领域,即报告者的“事件描述”和“制造商措施”,以评估报告者报告事件的质量。此外,还确定了两个领域的促成因素,即人为因素或技术因素,以评估所报告事件的质量。
确定了五种类型的问题,并且调查前后有所变化:机器与软件相关问题(n = 8)、机器与使用相关问题(n = 5)、软件与软件相关问题(n = 5)、使用与软件相关问题(n = 4)和使用与使用相关问题(n = 1)。超过三分之二(n = 15)的事件在调查后显示促成因素发生了变化。只有四起事件被确定在调查后改变了后果。
本研究揭示了事件报告问题以及报告和调查水平之间的差距。促进足够的员工培训课程、就健康信息技术系统的通用术语达成一致、完善现有分类系统、实施最小根本原因分析以及确保基于单位的本地报告和标准的国家报告,可能有助于弥合数字事件报告中报告和调查水平之间的差距。