{"title":"Why Simulation Matters: A Systematic Review on Medical Errors Occurring During Simulated Health Care.","authors":"Leshya Bokka, Francesco Ciuffo, Timothy C Clapper","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Over the past decade, the implementation of simulation education in health care has increased exponentially. Simulation-based education allows learners to practice patient care in a controlled, psychologically safe environment without the risk of harming a patient. Facilitators may identify medical errors during instruction, aiding in developing targeted education programs leading to improved patient safety. However, medical errors that occur during simulated health care may not be reported broadly in the simulation literature.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of the study is to identify and categorize the type and frequency of reported medical errors in healthcare simulation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Systematic review using search engines, PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, and SCOPUS from 2000 to 2020, using the terms \"healthcare simulation\" AND \"medical error.\" Inclusion was based on reported primary research of medical errors occurring during simulated health care. Reported errors were classified as errors of commission, omission, systems related, or communication related.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1105 articles screened, only 20 articles met inclusion criteria. Errors of commission were the most reported (17/20), followed by systems-related errors (13/20), and errors of omission (12/20). Only 7 articles reported errors attributed to communication. Authors in 16 articles reported more than one type of error.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Simulationists and patient safety advocates must continually identify systems-related errors and training deficits that can lead to inaction, improper action, and poor communication. Recent dialogs in the simulation community have also underscored the potential benefits of developing a registry of errors across simulation centers, with a goal of aggregating, analyzing, and disseminating insights from various simulation exercises.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000001192","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Over the past decade, the implementation of simulation education in health care has increased exponentially. Simulation-based education allows learners to practice patient care in a controlled, psychologically safe environment without the risk of harming a patient. Facilitators may identify medical errors during instruction, aiding in developing targeted education programs leading to improved patient safety. However, medical errors that occur during simulated health care may not be reported broadly in the simulation literature.
Objective: The aim of the study is to identify and categorize the type and frequency of reported medical errors in healthcare simulation.
Methods: Systematic review using search engines, PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, and SCOPUS from 2000 to 2020, using the terms "healthcare simulation" AND "medical error." Inclusion was based on reported primary research of medical errors occurring during simulated health care. Reported errors were classified as errors of commission, omission, systems related, or communication related.
Results: Of the 1105 articles screened, only 20 articles met inclusion criteria. Errors of commission were the most reported (17/20), followed by systems-related errors (13/20), and errors of omission (12/20). Only 7 articles reported errors attributed to communication. Authors in 16 articles reported more than one type of error.
Conclusions: Simulationists and patient safety advocates must continually identify systems-related errors and training deficits that can lead to inaction, improper action, and poor communication. Recent dialogs in the simulation community have also underscored the potential benefits of developing a registry of errors across simulation centers, with a goal of aggregating, analyzing, and disseminating insights from various simulation exercises.
期刊介绍：
Journal of Patient Safety (ISSN 1549-8417; online ISSN 1549-8425) is dedicated to presenting research advances and field applications in every area of patient safety. While Journal of Patient Safety has a research emphasis, it also publishes articles describing near-miss opportunities, system modifications that are barriers to error, and the impact of regulatory changes on healthcare delivery. This mix of research and real-world findings makes Journal of Patient Safety a valuable resource across the breadth of health professions and from bench to bedside.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
