Suppr超能文献

识别医疗护理引起的不良事件:回顾性病历审查中医师的一致程度。

Identifying adverse events caused by medical care: degree of physician agreement in a retrospective chart review.

作者信息

Localio A R, Weaver S L, Landis J R, Lawthers A G, Brenhan T A, Hebert L, Sharp T J

机构信息

Pennsylvania State University, College of Medicine, Hershey, USA.

出版信息

Ann Intern Med. 1996 Sep 15;125(6):457-64. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-125-6-199609150-00005.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To 1) assess the degree of agreement among physicians on the cause of previously flagged adverse outcomes and 2) relate the findings to systems of quality assurance and performance assessment and proposals for no-fault compensation for medical injuries.

DESIGN

Observational study of 7533 pairs of "structured implicit" reviews (subjective opinions based on guidelines) of medical records done by 127 physicians working independently.

SETTING

Random sample of 51 inpatient facilities in New York State.

PATIENTS

Random sample of inpatient medical records from the selected facilities.

MEASUREMENTS

  1. Number of agreed-upon adverse events compared with the number of cases of extreme disagreement and 2) internally and indirectly standardized rates at which physician reviewers found adverse events (injuries to patients caused at least in part by medical management).

RESULTS

In 12.9% of cases (971 of 7533), the two physicians in a pair had extreme disagreement about the occurrence of an adverse event. These cases outnumbered those in which both reviewers found an adverse event (10%; n = 757). Agreement was highest for wound infections and lowest for adverse events attributed to failure to diagnose or lack of therapy. The amount of experience the physicians had in reviewing records tended to increase the level of agreement. Even after standardization to the results of the entire sample, individual physicians' rates of finding at least slight evidence of an adverse event varied widely (range, 9.9% to 43.7%) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Structured implicit reviews produced disagreement on the causes of adverse patient outcomes. If systems of quality assurance, performance audits, or no-fault patient compensation are to succeed, methods for overcoming the common tendency toward disagreement among experts must be developed.

摘要

目的

1)评估医生之间就先前标记的不良后果原因达成一致的程度;2)将研究结果与质量保证和绩效评估系统以及医疗伤害无过错赔偿提议相关联。

设计

对127名独立工作的医生进行的7533对医疗记录的“结构化隐性”审查(基于指南的主观意见)的观察性研究。

设置

纽约州51家住院医疗机构的随机样本。

患者

所选医疗机构住院病历的随机样本。

测量

1)达成一致的不良事件数量与极度不一致的病例数量之比;2)医生审查员发现不良事件(至少部分由医疗管理导致的患者伤害)的内部和间接标准化率。

结果

在12.9%的病例中(7533例中的971例),一对医生对不良事件的发生存在极度分歧。这些病例的数量超过了两位审查员都发现不良事件的病例(10%;n = 757)。伤口感染的一致性最高,而因诊断失误或缺乏治疗导致的不良事件的一致性最低。医生审查记录的经验量往往会提高一致程度。即使对整个样本的结果进行标准化后,个别医生发现至少有轻微不良事件证据的比率仍有很大差异(范围为9.9%至43.7%)(P < 0.001)。

结论

结构化隐性审查在患者不良后果原因上产生了分歧。如果质量保证系统、绩效审计或无过错患者赔偿要取得成功,就必须开发克服专家间常见分歧倾向的方法。

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