To what extent are adverse events found in patient records reported by patients and healthcare professionals via complaints, claims and incident reports?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patient record review is believed to be the most useful method for estimating the rate of adverse events among hospitalised patients. However, the method has some practical and financial disadvantages. Some of these disadvantages mig...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: van der Wal Gerrit, Lubberding Sanne, Zwaan Laura, Smits Marleen, Christiaans-Dingelhoff Ingrid, Wagner Cordula
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2011-02-01
Series:BMC Health Services Research
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/11/49
_version_ 1818514981669306368
author van der Wal Gerrit
Lubberding Sanne
Zwaan Laura
Smits Marleen
Christiaans-Dingelhoff Ingrid
Wagner Cordula
author_facet van der Wal Gerrit
Lubberding Sanne
Zwaan Laura
Smits Marleen
Christiaans-Dingelhoff Ingrid
Wagner Cordula
author_sort van der Wal Gerrit
collection DOAJ
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patient record review is believed to be the most useful method for estimating the rate of adverse events among hospitalised patients. However, the method has some practical and financial disadvantages. Some of these disadvantages might be overcome by using existing reporting systems in which patient safety issues are already reported, such as incidents reported by healthcare professionals and complaints and medico-legal claims filled by patients or their relatives. The aim of the study is to examine to what extent the hospital reporting systems cover the adverse events identified by patient record review.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a retrospective study using a database from a record review study of 5375 patient records in 14 hospitals in the Netherlands. Trained nurses and physicians using a method based on the protocol of The Harvard Medical Practice Study previously reviewed the records. Four reporting systems were linked with the database of reviewed records: 1) informal and 2) formal complaints by patients/relatives, 3) medico-legal claims by patients/relatives and 4) incident reports by healthcare professionals. For each adverse event identified in patient records the equivalent was sought in these reporting systems by comparing dates and descriptions of the events. The study focussed on the number of adverse event matches, overlap of adverse events detected by different sources, preventability and severity of consequences of reported and non-reported events and sensitivity and specificity of reports.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In the sample of 5375 patient records, 498 adverse events were identified. Only 18 of the 498 (3.6%) adverse events identified by record review were found in one or more of the four reporting systems. There was some overlap: one adverse event had an equivalent in both a complaint and incident report and in three cases a patient/relative used two or three systems to complain about an adverse event. Healthcare professionals reported relatively more preventable adverse events than patients.</p> <p>Reports are not sensitive for adverse events nor do reports have a positive predictive value.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In order to detect the same adverse events as identified by patient record review, one cannot rely on the existing reporting systems within hospitals.</p>
first_indexed 2024-12-11T00:23:04Z
format Article
id doaj.art-0b1e8a6ef46b4e3e9cfc7d8cc2e554d2
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1472-6963
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-11T00:23:04Z
publishDate 2011-02-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Health Services Research
spelling doaj.art-0b1e8a6ef46b4e3e9cfc7d8cc2e554d22022-12-22T01:27:40ZengBMCBMC Health Services Research1472-69632011-02-011114910.1186/1472-6963-11-49To what extent are adverse events found in patient records reported by patients and healthcare professionals via complaints, claims and incident reports?van der Wal GerritLubberding SanneZwaan LauraSmits MarleenChristiaans-Dingelhoff IngridWagner Cordula<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patient record review is believed to be the most useful method for estimating the rate of adverse events among hospitalised patients. However, the method has some practical and financial disadvantages. Some of these disadvantages might be overcome by using existing reporting systems in which patient safety issues are already reported, such as incidents reported by healthcare professionals and complaints and medico-legal claims filled by patients or their relatives. The aim of the study is to examine to what extent the hospital reporting systems cover the adverse events identified by patient record review.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a retrospective study using a database from a record review study of 5375 patient records in 14 hospitals in the Netherlands. Trained nurses and physicians using a method based on the protocol of The Harvard Medical Practice Study previously reviewed the records. Four reporting systems were linked with the database of reviewed records: 1) informal and 2) formal complaints by patients/relatives, 3) medico-legal claims by patients/relatives and 4) incident reports by healthcare professionals. For each adverse event identified in patient records the equivalent was sought in these reporting systems by comparing dates and descriptions of the events. The study focussed on the number of adverse event matches, overlap of adverse events detected by different sources, preventability and severity of consequences of reported and non-reported events and sensitivity and specificity of reports.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In the sample of 5375 patient records, 498 adverse events were identified. Only 18 of the 498 (3.6%) adverse events identified by record review were found in one or more of the four reporting systems. There was some overlap: one adverse event had an equivalent in both a complaint and incident report and in three cases a patient/relative used two or three systems to complain about an adverse event. Healthcare professionals reported relatively more preventable adverse events than patients.</p> <p>Reports are not sensitive for adverse events nor do reports have a positive predictive value.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In order to detect the same adverse events as identified by patient record review, one cannot rely on the existing reporting systems within hospitals.</p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/11/49
spellingShingle van der Wal Gerrit
Lubberding Sanne
Zwaan Laura
Smits Marleen
Christiaans-Dingelhoff Ingrid
Wagner Cordula
To what extent are adverse events found in patient records reported by patients and healthcare professionals via complaints, claims and incident reports?
BMC Health Services Research
title To what extent are adverse events found in patient records reported by patients and healthcare professionals via complaints, claims and incident reports?
title_full To what extent are adverse events found in patient records reported by patients and healthcare professionals via complaints, claims and incident reports?
title_fullStr To what extent are adverse events found in patient records reported by patients and healthcare professionals via complaints, claims and incident reports?
title_full_unstemmed To what extent are adverse events found in patient records reported by patients and healthcare professionals via complaints, claims and incident reports?
title_short To what extent are adverse events found in patient records reported by patients and healthcare professionals via complaints, claims and incident reports?
title_sort to what extent are adverse events found in patient records reported by patients and healthcare professionals via complaints claims and incident reports
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/11/49
work_keys_str_mv AT vanderwalgerrit towhatextentareadverseeventsfoundinpatientrecordsreportedbypatientsandhealthcareprofessionalsviacomplaintsclaimsandincidentreports
AT lubberdingsanne towhatextentareadverseeventsfoundinpatientrecordsreportedbypatientsandhealthcareprofessionalsviacomplaintsclaimsandincidentreports
AT zwaanlaura towhatextentareadverseeventsfoundinpatientrecordsreportedbypatientsandhealthcareprofessionalsviacomplaintsclaimsandincidentreports
AT smitsmarleen towhatextentareadverseeventsfoundinpatientrecordsreportedbypatientsandhealthcareprofessionalsviacomplaintsclaimsandincidentreports
AT christiaansdingelhoffingrid towhatextentareadverseeventsfoundinpatientrecordsreportedbypatientsandhealthcareprofessionalsviacomplaintsclaimsandincidentreports
AT wagnercordula towhatextentareadverseeventsfoundinpatientrecordsreportedbypatientsandhealthcareprofessionalsviacomplaintsclaimsandincidentreports