Prospective methods for identifying perioperative risk-assessment methods for patient safety over 20 years: a systematic review

被引:2
作者
Heideveld-Chevalking, A. J. [1 ]
Calsbeek, H. [2 ]
Hofland, J. [3 ]
Meijerink, W. J. H. J. [1 ]
Wolff, A. P. [4 ]
机构
[1] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Dept Operating Rooms, Med Ctr, POB 9101,715, NL-6525 GA Nijmegen, Netherlands
[2] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, IQ Healthcare, Med Ctr, Radboud Inst Hlth Sci, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[3] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Dept Anaesthesiol, Med Ctr, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[4] Univ Groningen, Dept Anaesthesiol, Med Ctr, Groningen, Netherlands
来源
BJS OPEN | 2020年 / 4卷 / 02期
关键词
ADVERSE EVENTS; SURGERY; QUALITY; HOSPITALS; CARE; IDENTIFICATION; CRITERIA; HAZARDS; COHORT; TIME;
D O I
10.1002/bjs5.50246
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Serious preventable surgical events still occur despite considerable efforts to improve patient safety. In addition to learning from retrospective analyses, prospective risk-assessment methods may help to decrease preventable events further by targeting perioperative hazards. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the methods used to identify perioperative patient safety risks prospectively, and to describe the risk areas targeted, the quality characteristics and feasibility of methods. Methods MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane databases were searched, adhering to PRISMA guidelines. All studies describing the development and results of prospective methods to identify perioperative patient safety risks were included and assessed on methodological quality. Exclusion criteria were interventional studies, studies targeting one specific issue, studies reporting on structural factors relating to fundamental hospital items, and non-original or case studies. Results The electronic search resulted in 16 708 publications, but only 20 were included for final analysis, describing five prospective risk-assessment methods. Direct observation was used in most studies, often in combination. Direct (16 studies) and indirect (4 studies) observations identified (potential) adverse events (P)AEs, process flow disruptions, poor protocol compliance and poor practice performance. (Modified) Healthcare Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (HFMEA (TM)) (5 studies) targeted potential process flow disruption failures, and direct (P)AE surveillance (3 studies) identified (P)AEs prospectively. Questionnaires (3 studies) identified poor protocol compliance, surgical flow disturbances and patients' willingness to ask questions about their care. Overall, quality characteristics and feasibility of the methods were poorly reported. Conclusion The direct (in-person) observation appears to be the primary prospective risk-assessment method that currently may best help to target perioperative hazards. This is a reliable method and covers a broad spectrum of perioperative risk areas.
引用
收藏
页码:197 / 205
页数:9
相关论文
共 45 条
  • [1] A Systematic Proactive Risk Assessment of Hazards in Surgical Wards A Quantitative Study
    Anderson, Oliver
    Brodie, Andrea
    Vincent, Charles A.
    Hanna, George B.
    [J]. ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2012, 255 (06) : 1086 - 1092
  • [2] [Anonymous], J PATIENT SAFETY
  • [3] Changes in adverse event rates in hospitals over time: a longitudinal retrospective patient record review study
    Baines, Rebecca J.
    Langelaan, Maaike
    de Bruijne, Martine C.
    Asscheman, Henk
    Spreeuwenberg, Peter
    van de Steeg, Lotte
    Siemerink, Kitty M.
    van Rosse, Floor
    Broekens, Maren
    Wagner, Cordula
    [J]. BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY, 2013, 22 (04) : 290 - 298
  • [4] The Canadian Adverse Events Study:: the incidence of adverse events among hospital patients in Canada
    Baker, GR
    Norton, PG
    Flintoft, V
    Blais, R
    Brown, A
    Cox, J
    Etchells, E
    Ghali, WA
    Hébert, P
    Majumdar, SR
    O'Beirne, M
    Palacios-Derflingher, L
    Reid, RJ
    Sheps, S
    Tamblyn, R
    [J]. CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 2004, 170 (11) : 1678 - 1686
  • [5] Clinical outcome monitoring in a reproductive surgery unit: a prospective cohort study in 796 patients
    Bentz, Eva-Katrin
    Imhof, Martin
    Pateisky, Norbert
    Ott, Johannes
    Huber, Johannes C.
    Hefler, Lukas A.
    Tempfer, Clemens B.
    [J]. FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2009, 91 (06) : 2638 - 2642
  • [6] Challenges in Reducing Surgical "Never Events"
    Berger, Elizabeth R.
    Greenberg, Caprice C.
    Bilimoria, Karl Y.
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2015, 314 (13): : 1386 - 1387
  • [7] Measuring surgical safety during minimally invasive surgical procedures: a validation study
    Blikkendaal, Mathijs D.
    Driessen, Sara R. C.
    Rodrigues, Sharon P.
    Rhemrev, Johann P. T.
    Smeets, Maddy J. G. H.
    Dankelman, Jenny
    van den Dobbelsteen, John J.
    Jansen, Frank Willem
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2018, 32 (07): : 3087 - 3095
  • [8] BORNS J, 2018, PEDIAT EMERG CARE
  • [9] HOSPITAL CHARACTERISTICS ASSOCIATED WITH ADVERSE EVENTS AND SUBSTANDARD CARE
    BRENNAN, TA
    HEBERT, LE
    LAIRD, NM
    LAWTHERS, A
    THORPE, KE
    LEAPE, LL
    LOCALIO, AR
    LIPSITZ, SR
    NEWHOUSE, JP
    WEILER, PC
    HIATT, HH
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1991, 265 (24): : 3265 - 3269
  • [10] Improving patient safety by identifying latent failures in successful operations
    Catchpole, Ken R.
    Giddings, Anthony E. B.
    Wilkinson, Michael
    Hirst, Guy
    Dale, Trevor
    de Leval, Marc R.
    [J]. SURGERY, 2007, 142 (01) : 102 - 110