Journal of Patient Safety最新文献

{"title":"Publication Trends of Research on Adverse Event and Patient Safety in Nursing Research: A 8-Year Bibliometric Analysis.","authors":"Miaoyuan Lin, Bei Chen, Leyao Xiao, Li Zhang","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001207","DOIUrl":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001207","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adverse events (AEs), which are associated with medical system instability, poor clinical outcomes, and increasing socioeconomic burden, represent a negative outcome of the healthcare system and profoundly influence patient safety. However, research into AEs remains at a developmental stage according to the existing literature, and no previous studies have systematically reviewed the current state of research in the field of AEs. Therefore, the aims of this study were to interpret the results of published research in the field of AEs through bibliometric analysis and to analyze the trends and patterns in the data, which will be important for subsequent innovations in the field.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A statistical and retrospective visualization bibliometric analysis was performed on July 28, 2022. The research data were extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection, and bibliometric citation analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel, VOSviewer 1.6.18, CiteSpace 6.1.R2, and the Online Analysis Platform of Literature Metrology ( http://bibliometric.com/ ).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1035 publications on AEs were included in the analysis. The number of articles increased annually from 2014 to 2022. Among them, the United States (n = 318) made the largest contribution, and Chung-Ang University (n = 20) was the affiliation with the greatest influence in this field. Despite notable international cooperation, a regional concentration of research literature production was observed in economically more developed countries. In terms of authors, Stone ND (n = 9) was the most productive author in the research of AEs. Most of the publications concerning AEs were cited from internationally influential nursing journals, and the Journal of Nursing Management (n = 62) was the most highly published journal. Regarding referencing, the article titled \"Medical error-the third leading cause of death in the US\" received the greatest attention on this topic (51 citations).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>After systematically reviewed the current state of research in the field of AEs through bibliometric analysis, and AEs highlighted medication errors, patient safety, according reporting, and quality improvement as essential developments and research hotspots in this field. Furthermore, thematic analysis identified 2 new directions in research, concerned with psychological safety, nurse burnout, and with important research value and broad application prospects in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"288-298"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139693324","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reframing the Morbidity and Mortality Conference: The Impact of a Just Culture.","authors":"Karolina Brook, Aalok V Agarwala, George L Tewfik","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001224","DOIUrl":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001224","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Morbidity and mortality (M&M) conferences are prevalent in all fields of medicine. Historically, they arose out a desire to improve medical care. Nevertheless, the goals of M&M conferences are often poorly defined, at odds with one another, and do not support a just culture. We differentiate among the various possible goals of an M&M and review the literature for strategies that have been shown to achieve these goals. Based on the literature, we outline an ideal M&M structure within the context of just culture: The process starts with robust adverse event and near miss reporting, followed by careful case selection, excluding cases solely attributable to individual error. Prior to the M&M, the case should be openly discussed with involved members and should be reviewed using a selected framework. The goal of the M&M should be selected and clearly defined, and the presentation format and rules of conduct should all conform to the selected presentation goal. The audience should ideally be multidisciplinary and multispecialty. The M&M should conclude with concrete tasks and assigned follow-up. The entire process should be conducted in a peer review protected format within an environment promoting psychological safety. We conclude with future directions for M&Ms.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"280-287"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140111866","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Importance of Quality of Medical Record: Differences in Patient Safety Incident Inquiry Results According to Assessment for Quality of Medical Record.","authors":"Hyeran Jeong, Eun Young Choi, Won Lee, Seung Gyeong Jang, Jeehee Pyo, Minsu Ock","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001212","DOIUrl":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001212","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medical record review is the gold standard method of identifying adverse events. However, the quality of medical records is a critical factor that can affect the accuracy of adverse event detection. Few studies have examined the impact of medical record quality on the identification of adverse events.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In this study, we analyze whether there were differences in screening criteria and characteristics of adverse events according to the quality of medical records evaluated in the patient safety incident inquiry in Korea.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patient safety incident inquiry was conducted in 2019 on 7500 patients in Korea to evaluate their screening criteria, adverse events, and preventability. Furthermore, medical records quality judged by reviewers was evaluated on a 4-point scale. The χ 2 test was used to examine differences in patient safety incident inquiry results according to medical record quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cases with inadequate medical records had higher rates of identified screening criteria than those with adequate records (88.8% versus 55.7%). Medical records judged inadequate had a higher rate of confirmed adverse events than those judged adequate. \"Drugs, fluids, and blood-related events,\" \"diagnosis-related events,\" and \"patient care-related events\" were more frequently identified in cases with inadequate medical records. There was no statistically significant difference in the preventability of adverse events according to the medical record quality.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Lower medical record quality was associated with higher rates of identified screening criteria and confirmed adverse events. Patient safety incident inquiry should specify medical record quality evaluation questions more accurately to more clearly estimate the impact of medical record quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"229-235"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140040660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Hospital Inpatient Nutrition Service Errors and Patient Safety Interventions: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Davis Austria, Chelsea McConnell, Charlene Pope","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001223","DOIUrl":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001223","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Food service errors are prevalent in healthcare hospital inpatient settings. Like medication administration errors, these mistakes can result in disastrous consequences. This scoping review aimed to identify the evidence describing hospitals' nutrition department service errors and subsequent patient safety interventions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review was conducted on four electronic databases, OVID MedlinePlus, PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL, to search for articles reporting hospital food-related errors. All studies and reports on parenteral nutrition were excluded, and errors reported by departments other than nutrition services were excluded. A total of 245 studies published from 1984 to 2022 were identified. After removing duplicates, 98 abstracts were evaluated, with particular attention given to dietary errors, meal accuracy, and interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-nine articles were selected, and 14 (n = 14) were considered relevant to the review after a full-text review. More than half of the studies (n = 8) were conducted outside the United States. Eight studies (n = 8) were descriptive, retrospective, and observational; 3 were mixed-method studies (n = 3), 2 (n = 2) were quality improvement projects, and 1 was an implementation study (n = 1). Four (n = 4) studies were published before the year 2000.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Various types of nutrition service inaccuracies were identified. The severity, causes, and stages of food service provision where errors occur were also documented. These errors were used as the basis for interventions to improve patient safety, justify implementing computerized dietary services systems, or add resources to augment dietary department service offerings. This review also generated valuable recommendations to promote patient safety by mitigating food service errors.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"272-278"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140295060","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Prospective Quasi-Experimental Study of Multifaceted Interventions Including Computerized Drug Utilization Evaluation to Improve an Antibiotic Stewardship Program.","authors":"Sunudtha Suksamai, Sirinporn Sajak, Kanokporn Thongphubeth, Thana Khawcharoenporn","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001211","DOIUrl":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001211","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to determine and evaluate interventions that improve an antibiotic stewardship program (ASP) in reduction of the amount of antibiotic use and errors in drug utilization evaluation (DUE) form completion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective quasi-experimental study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the multifaceted interventions (preauthorization with computerized DUE, self-supervised checklists, and short active reminders of the antibiotic guidelines recommendations) incorporating an ASP among hospitalized internal medicine patients in a Thai tertiary care center. The preintervention period was from January to December 2018, and the postintervention period was from February 2019 to January 2020.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 9188 and 9787 patient data were analyzed during the preintervention and postintervention periods, respectively. The overall median antibiotic use (defined daily dose/1000 bed-days) was significantly decreased in the postintervention period compared with the preintervention period (867.68 versus 732.33; P < 0.001). The reduction in antibiotic use was predominantly observed among broad-spectrum antibiotics, including cefoperazone/sulbactam (15.35 versus 9.75; P = 0.04), cefepime (13.09 versus 6.37; P = 0.003), ciprofloxacin (32.99 versus 17.83; P < 0.001), piperacillin/tazobactam (99.23 versus 91.93; P = 0.03), meropenem (2.01 versus 0.99; P < 0.001), imipenem/cilastatin (9.53 versus 4.59; P = 0.04), and colistin (74.70 versus 22.34; P < 0.0001). The overall rate of errors in DUE form completion was significantly decreased after the intervention (40% versus 28%; P < 0.001). The incidence of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infections/colonization was significantly lower in the postintervention period (0.27 versus 0.12/1000 bed-days; P = 0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study multifaceted interventions incorporating ASP were associated with significant reduction in the amount of broad-spectrum antibiotic use, DUE form completion errors, and incidence of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infection/colonization.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"e9-e17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139900776","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Impact of Collaborative Nursing Care Delivery on Patient Safety Events in an Emergency Intensive Care Unit: A Retrospective Observational Study.","authors":"Masato Obayashi, Keiichiro Shimoyama, Koji Ono","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001215","DOIUrl":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001215","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Patient safety events (PSEs) have detrimental consequences for patients and healthcare staff, highlighting the importance of prevention. Although evidence shows that nurse staffing affects PSEs, the role of an appropriate nursing care delivery system remains unclear. The current study aimed to investigate whether nursing care delivery systems could prevent PSEs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study was conducted in Japan. The study examined the collaborative 4:2 nursing care delivery system in which 2 nurses are assigned to care for 4 patients, collaborating to perform tasks, and provide care. The cohort receiving care from a collaborative 4:2 nursing care delivery system was labeled the postintervention, whereas the cohort receiving care from a conventional individualized system, in which one nurse provides care for 2 patients, was labeled the preintervention. The primary outcome was the occurrence of PSEs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The preintervention and postintervention comprised 561 and 401 patients, respectively, with the latter consisting of a younger and more critically ill population. The number of PSEs per 1000 patient-days was not significantly different between the 2 groups (10.3 [95% confidence interval, 7.1-13.5] versus 6.0 [95% confidence interval, 3.2-8.9], P = 0.058). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that the collaborative 4:2 nursing care delivery system was significantly associated with PSEs (adjusted odds ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.95; P = 0.037).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings suggest that in an emergency intensive care unit, a collaborative nursing care delivery system was associated with a decrease in PSEs.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"252-258"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140040659","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Evolution of Intravenous Medication Errors and Preventive Systemic Defenses in Hospital Settings-A Narrative Review of Recent Evidence.","authors":"Sini Kuitunen, Marja Airaksinen, Anna-Riia Holmström","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001222","DOIUrl":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001222","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Intravenous drug administration has been associated with severe medication errors in hospitals. The present narrative review is based on a systematic literature search, and aimed to describe the recent evolution in research on systemic causes and defenses in intravenous medication errors in hospitals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This narrative review was based on Reason's theory of systems-based risk management. A systematic literature search covering the period from June 2016 to October 2021 was conducted on Medline (Ovid). We used the search strategy and selection criteria developed for our previous systematic reviews. The included articles were analyzed and compared to our previous reviews.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The updated search found 435 articles. Of the 63 included articles, 16 focused on systemic causes of intravenous medication errors, and 47 on systemic defenses. A high proportion (n = 24, 38%) of the studies were conducted in the United States or Canada. Most of the studies focused on drug administration (n = 21/63, 33%) and preparation (n = 19/63, 30%). Compared to our previous review of error causes, more studies (n = 5/16, 31%) utilized research designs with a prospective risk management approach. Within articles related to systemic defenses, smart infusion pumps remained most widely studied (n = 10/47, 21%), while those related to preparation technologies (n = 7/47, 15%) had increased.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This narrative review demonstrates a growing interest in systems-based risk management for intravenous drug therapy and in introducing new technology, particularly smart infusion pumps and preparation systems, as systemic defenses. When introducing new technologies, prospective assessment and continuous monitoring of emerging safety risks should be conducted.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"e29-e39"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140295059","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Implementation of Guidelines Limiting Postoperative Opioid Prescribing at a Children's Hospital.","authors":"Krista J Stephenson, Derek J Krinock, Isabel L Vasquez, Connor N Shewmake, Beverly J Spray, Bavana Ketha, Lindsey L Wolf, Melvin S Dassinger","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001209","DOIUrl":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001209","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Variability in opioid-prescribing practices after common pediatric surgical procedures at our institution prompted the development of opioid-prescribing guidelines that provided suggested dose limitations for narcotics. The aims of this study were to improve opioid prescription practices through implementation of the developed guidelines and to assess compliance and identify barriers preventing guideline utilization.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a single-center cohort study of all children who underwent the most common outpatient general surgery procedures at our institution from August 1, 2018, to February 1, 2020. We created guidelines designed to limit opioid prescription doses based on data obtained from standardized postoperative telephone interviews. Three 6-month periods were evaluated: before guideline implementation, after guideline initiation, and after addressing barriers to guideline compliance. Targeted interventions to increase compliance included modification of electronic medical record defaults and provider educations. Differences in opioid weight-based doses prescribed, filled, and taken, as well as protocol adherence between the 3 timeframes were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1033 children underwent an outpatient procedure during the 1.5-year time frame. Phone call response rate was 72.22%. There was a significant sustained decrease in opioid doses prescribed ( P < 0.0001), prescriptions filled ( P = 0.009), and opioid doses taken ( P = 0.001) after implementation, without subsequent increase in reported pain on postoperative phone call ( P = 0.96). Protocol compliance significantly improved (62.39% versus 83.98%, P < 0.0001) after obstacles were addressed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Implementation of a protocol limiting opioid prescribing after frequently performed pediatric general surgery procedures reduced opioids prescribed and taken postoperatively. Interventions that addressed barriers to application led to increased protocol compliance and sustained decreases in opioids prescribed and taken without a deleterious effect on pain control.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"299-305"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139492611","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Development of a Psychological Scale for Measuring Disruptive Clinician Behavior: Erratum.","authors":"","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001250","DOIUrl":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001250","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"279"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140922493","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comparison of WHO-UMC and Naranjo Scales for Causality Assessment of Reported Adverse Drug Reactions.","authors":"Sukant Pandit, Dhruve Soni, Bhaskar Krishnamurthy, Mahesh N Belhekar","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001213","DOIUrl":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001213","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The 2 most commonly used scales worldwide are the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre (WHO-UMC) and the Naranjo scales. The present study was planned to assess the degree of agreement between the 2 scales when the same adverse drug reactions (ADR) were assessed by 5 raters independently.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>One hundred individual case safety reports were selected randomly from the ADR database of our institute and the details were emailed to 5 different experts (raters), who were DM Clinical Pharmacology residents from different institutes in India. An independent causality assessment of these ADRs was performed independently by these raters using both the WHO-UMC and Naranjo causality assessment scales. The agreement between the 2 scales was assessed for each rater using Cohen κ, and the overall interrater agreement was assessed using Fleiss κ.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Cohen κ level of agreement between the 2 scales for the 5 raters were substantial, fair, substantial, moderate, and substantial, respectively. The most common causality assessment category as per WHO-UMC scale was \"possible\" but varied among the raters on the Naranjo scale. No ADR was categorized as \"certain\" by any rater on the Naranjo scale. The Fleiss κ value for agreement among the 5 raters was found to be 0.2 (slight) for the WHO-UMC scale and 0.297 (fair) for the Naranjo scale.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A moderate level of agreement was observed in this study between the WHO-UMC and Naranjo scales. The level of agreement among these 5 raters was found to be similar for the WHO-UMC and the Naranjo scales, indicating a similar degree of subjectivity for the 2 scales. Hence, more robust and less subjective scales are required for causality assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"236-239"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139724646","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}