Learning from Taiwan patient-safety reporting system

The Intra-Hospital Medical Dispute Burden and Capacities: A Nationwide Survey in Taiwan

(1) Background: Medical disputes have long been resolved via lawsuits. Alternative dispute resolutions have been promoted for their benefits and win-win results. This study aims to investigate Taiwanese hospital medical dispute capacities and burdens. (2) Methods: This study used 2015 nationwide questionnaire data. The number and value of medical disputes that occurred in 2014 was examined to evaluate hospitals' capabilities. Poisson regressions were used to determine the impact of coping abilities on the incidence of disputes and the associated compensation. (3) Results: The response rate of the questionnaire was 90%. Hospital features associated with higher medical disputes incidence included those of a scale ≤ 100 or 200-499 and having a dispute-inform process of over 4 h. In contrast, hospitals whose compensation fund was solely based on medical liability insurance reported less medical dispute incidence. The features associated with higher compensation were lack of continuing training and having a dispute-inform process over 4 h. In contrast, hospitals with standard operating procedures for in-hospital mediation and solicitude paid lower compensation. (4) Conclusions: Hospitals with quicker response times experienced fewer medical disputes and paid lower compensation. Dispute coping skills, other than reaction time, were more visible in compensation bargaining, but were not significantly correlated with incidence.

Comparison of Patient Safety Incident Reporting Systems in Taiwan, Malaysia, and Indonesia

OBJECTIVES

Incident reporting is one of the tools used to improve patient safety that has been widely used in health facilities in many countries. Incident reporting systems provide functionality to collect, analyze, and disseminate lessons learned to the wider community, whether at the hospital or national level. The aim of this study was to compare the patient safety incident reporting systems of Taiwan, Malaysia, and Indonesia to identify similarities, differences, and areas for improvement.

METHODS

We searched the official Web sites and homepages of the responsible leading patient safety agencies of the three countries. We reviewed all publicly available guidelines, regulatory documents, government reports that included policies, guidelines, strategy papers, reports, evaluation programs, as well as scientific articles and gray literature related to the incident reporting system. We used the World Health Organization components of patient safety reporting system as the guidelines for comparison and analyzed the documents using descriptive comparative analysis.

RESULTS

Taiwan had the most incidents reported, followed by Malaysia and Indonesia. Taiwan Patient Safety Reporting (TPR) and the Malaysian Reporting and Learning System had similar attributes and followed the World Health Organization components for incident reporting. We found differences between the Indonesian system and both of TPR and the Malaysian system. Indonesia did not have an external reporting deadline, analysis and learning were conducted at the national level, and there was a lack of transparency and public access to data and reports. All systems need to establish a clear and structured incident reporting evaluation framework if they are to be successful.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with TPR and Malaysian system, the Indonesian patient safety incident reporting system seemed to be ineffective because it failed to acquire adequate national incident reporting data and lacked transparency; these deficiencies inhibited learning at the national level. We suggest further research on the implementation at the hospital level to see how far national guidelines and policy have been implemented in each country.

The acceptance of CIRS among orthopedic and trauma surgeons in Germany-Significant gap between positive perception and actual implementation in daily routine

PURPOSE

Medical errors are the third leading cause of death in the United States after malignant tumors and cardiovascular disease. Handling of errors becomes more and more eclectic due to the implementation of incident reporting systems and the use of checklists. Since 2015, any German hospital would have a critical incident reporting system (CIRS). The aim of this study is to discover the nationwide utilization and attitude toward CIRS of orthopedic and trauma surgeons.

METHODS

Between April 10, 2015 and May 22, 2015, a web-based questionnaire, which was designed by an expert team consisting of orthopedic and trauma surgeons, aeronautic human factors specialists, and psychologists (Lufthansa Aviation Training), was sent to all members of the German Society for Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery. The survey consisted of three questions regarding CIRS and its use in German hospitals.

RESULTS

A total of 669 orthopedic and trauma surgeons working in German hospitals completed the questionnaire. All participants rated CIRS as useful, although 71.3% of participants did not report a critical incident in the last 12 months. In that time period, only 13.4% of participating residents reported at least one incident, but 44.7% of chief physicians reported one incident within the same period.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrates that even though CIRS as a tool is positively appreciated by orthopedic and trauma surgeons working in German hospitals, many do not know about its existence at their own hospital. This can be a reason for the low number of critical incidents reported.

Patient Safety Event Reporting and Opportunities for Emergency Medicine Resident Education

Introduction

Healthcare systems often expose patients to significant, preventable harm causing an estimated 44,000 to 98,000 deaths or more annually. This has propelled patient safety to the forefront, with reporting systems allowing for the review of local events to determine their root causes. As residents engage in a substantial amount of patient care in academic emergency departments, it is critical to use these safety event reports for resident-focused interventions and educational initiatives. This study analyzes reports from the Virginia Commonwealth University Health System to understand how the reports are categorized and how it relates to opportunities for resident education.

Methods

Identifying categories from the literature, three subject matter experts (attending physician, nursing director, registered nurse) categorized an initial 20 reports to resolve category gaps and then 100 reports to determine inter-rater reliability. Given sufficient agreement, the remaining 400 reports were coded individually for type of event and education among other categories.

Results

After reviewing 513 events, we found that the most common event types were issues related to staff and resident training (25%) and communication (18%), with 31% requiring no education, 46% requiring directed educational feedback to an individual or group, 20% requiring education through monthly safety updates or meetings, 3% requiring urgent communication by email or in-person, and <1% requiring simulation.

Conclusion

Twenty years after the publication of To Err is Human, gains have been made integrating quality assurance and patient safety within medical education and hospital systems, but there remains extensive work to be done. Through a review and analysis of our patient safety event reporting system, we were able to gain a better understanding of the events that are submitted, including the types of events and their severity, and how these relate to the types of educational interventions provided (eg, feedback, simulation). We also determined that these events can help inform resident education and learning using various types of education. Additionally, incorporating residents in the review process, such as through root cause analyses, can provide residents with high-quality, engaging learning opportunities and useful, lifelong skills, which is invaluable to our learners and future physicians.

Patient Safety Incident Reporting In Indonesia: An Analysis Using World Health Organization Characteristics For Successful Reporting

Background

Incident reporting is widely acknowledged as one of the ways of improving patient safety and has been implemented in Indonesia for more than ten years. However, there was no significant increase in the number of reported incidents nationally. The study described in this paper aimed at assessing the extent to which Indonesia’s patient safety incident reporting system has adhered to the World Health Organization (WHO) characteristics for successful reporting.

Methods

We interviewed officials from 16 organizations at national, provincial and district or city levels in Indonesia. We reviewed several policies, guidelines and regulations pertinent to incident reporting in Indonesia and examined whether the WHO characteristics were covered in these documents. We used NVivo version 9 to manage the interview data and applied thematic analysis to organize our findings.

Results

Our study found that there was an increased need for a non-punitive system, confidentiality, expert-analysis and timeliness of reporting, system-orientation and responsiveness. The existing guidelines, policies and regulations in Indonesia, to a large extent, have not satisfied all the required WHO characteristics of incident reporting. Furthermore, awareness and understanding of the reporting system amongst officials at almost all levels were lacking.

Conclusion

Despite being implemented for more than a decade, Indonesia’s patient safety incident reporting system has not fully adhered to the WHO guidelines. There is a pressing need for the Indonesian Government to improve the system, by putting specific regulations and by creating a robust infrastructure at all levels to support the incident reporting.

A cross-validation study of the incident-reporting attitude scale for staff in long-term care facilities-A cross-sectional study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To test the construct and concurrent validity and reliability of the incident-reporting attitude scale used for staff in long-term care facilities (IRA-LTC) by the two-phase cross-validation method.

BACKGROUND

Lack of accurate measurement on incident-reporting attitude might hinder improvements of safety practice in long-term care facilities.

DESIGN/METHODS

A two-phase cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted in Taiwan. A fixed proportion of long-term care facilities were randomly selected that included 20 and 15 long-term care facilities at phases one and two separately. Nursing and administrative staffs in these facilities were recruited at the first phase (N = 207) for testing the validity and reliability of the newly developed scale and for cross-validation of the scale at the second phase (N = 251). The scale of IRA-LTC was a self-developed structured questionnaire consisting of 31 items. The data were analysed using spss for Windows 20.0 and AMOS 24.0. Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, Cronbach's α, exploratory and confirmatory factory analysis were carried to examine the homogeneity of items, reliability, construct and concurrent validity. The STROBE checklist was adhered (See Appendix S1).

RESULTS

The IRA-LTC scale comprised two dimensions: "cognition and intention to report" and "barriers to report." The two-factor structure explained 60.20%-61.89% of the total variance at two phases. Validation of the initial factorial model gained at the first phase was satisfactorily supported at the second phase. Concurrent validity of the IRA-LTC scale was satisfied. Cronbach's α for the scale and subscales was 0.94-0.97.

CONCLUSIONS

This IRA-LTC scale is valid and reliable and can be recommended to evaluate the incident-reporting attitude among all kinds of staff in long-term care facilities.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Positive incident-reporting attitude can lead to positive incident-reporting behaviour. Using the IRA-LTC scale for assessing staff's incident-reporting attitude is recommended as the first step to enhance staff's safety performance in long-term care facilities.

Implications from China patient safety incidents reporting system

Objective

We aimed to explain the operational mechanism of China National Patient Safety Incidents Reporting System, analyze patterns and trends of incidents reporting, and discuss the implication of the incidents reporting to improve hospital patient safety.

Design

A nationwide, registry-based, observational study design.

Data source

The database of China National Patient Safety Incidents Reporting System.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures of this study included the temporal, regional, and hospital distribution of the reports, as well as the incident type, location, parties, and possible reasons for frequently occurring incidents.

Results

During 2012–2017, 36,498 patient safety incidents were reported. By analyzing the time trends, we found that there was a significant upward trend on incidents reporting in China. The most common type of incidents was drug-related incidents, followed by nursing-related incidents and surgery-related incidents. The three most frequent locations of incident occurrence were Patient’s Room (65.4%), Ambulatory Care Unit (8.4%), and Intensive Care Unit (7.4%). The majority of the incidents involved nurses (40.7%), followed by physicians (29.5%) and medical technologist (13.6%). About 44.4% of the incidents were attributed to the junior staff (work experience ≤5 years). In addition, incidents triggered by the senior staff (work experience >5 years) were more often associated with severe patient harm.

Conclusion

To strengthen the incidents reporting system and generate useful evidence through learning from incidents reporting will be important to China’s success in improving the nation’s patient safety status.