The aim of the study was to investigate the feasibility of using administrative data to screen adverse events in Korea. Methods:We used a diagnosis-related groups claims data set and the information of the checklist of healthcare quality improvement (a part of the value incentive program) to verify adverse events in fiscal year 2018. Adverse events were identified using patient safety indicator (PSI) clusters and a present on admission indicator (POA). The PSIs consisted of 19 clusters representing subcategories of adverse events, such as hospital-acquired infection. Among the adverse events identified using PSI clusters, "POA = N," which means not present at the time of admission, was only deemed as the case in the final stage. We compared the agreement on the occurrence of adverse events from claims data with a reference standard data set (i.e., checklist of healthcare quality improvement) and presented them by PSI cluster and institution. Results:The cases of global PSI for any adverse event numbered 27,320(2.32%) among all diagnostic codes in 2018. In terms of institutional distribution, considerable variation was observed throughout the clusters. For example, only 13.2% of institutions (n = 387) reported any global PSI for any adverse event throughout the whole year. The agreement between the reference standard and the claims data was poor, in the range of 2.2% to 10.8%, in 3 types of adverse events. The current claims data system (i.e., diagnostic codes coupled to POA indicators) failed to capture a large majority of adverse events identified using the reference standard. Conclusions:Our results imply that the coding status of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, codes and POA indicators should be refined before using them as quality indicators.

Aims: Colon perforation is the most serious complication of colonoscopy, and tends to be considered as malpractice. The aim of this study was to identify the characteristics and causes of medical accidents by analyzing lawsuit cases on colon perforation during colonoscopy. Methods: We collected judgment results that were ruled from 2005 to 2015 using the keyword of 'colonoscopy' in the 'Korea's Written Judgment Public Reading System' of the Supreme Court, and extracted the cases of colon perforation. Characteristics of medical accidents and the decisions of courts were analyzed from written judgments. Results: Twenty-two lawsuits were analyzed. Most cases were ruled in favor of the plaintiff (n=20). The allegations against defendants, filed by the plaintiffs, were the performance error (n=22), the improper monitoring after colonoscopy (n=7), and the lack of informed consent (n=8). The median compensation was 9,335.47 US dollar, this is about 130 times the cost of a single colonoscopy in Korea. The greater the intestinal damage, the greater the amount of compensation (p=0.016). The time interval from procedure to diagnosis of perforation was most frequently 24 hours later (n=9). Conclusions: It is important to educate patients fully about the symptoms of colon perforation and to guide them to contact medical institutions immediately when symptoms occur. In addition, doctors should explain sufficiently the possibility of perforation before colonoscopy to the patients, not caregiver, and get an informed consent. What's already known about this topic?Medical accidents can be experienced by any doctor, and especially gastroenterologists are always being exposed to risk of developing perforation during colonoscopy. What does this article add?This is the first study to analyze the characteristics of lawsuit cases of the colon perforation. Most of the lawsuit cases related to colonoscopic perforation were judged in favor of the plaintiff, and the greater the intestinal damage, the greater the amount of compensation. The court declared the doctor's negligence, but reduced liability for damages if appropriate actions were taken.

No abstract

In 2018, The Ministry of Health and Welfare announced its first comprehensive plan for patient safety, which included the imperative to develop a patient safety curriculum for students studying to become health professionals. The aim of this study is to assess current patient safety education and points of consideration for introducing new curriculum. An online survey was used to understand the status of patient safety education in medical schools, and key informant interviews and focus group interviews were used to collect qualitative data on the experience of patient safety education. The results of the online survey from 16 out of 40 medical schools (40% response rate) and the qualitative data analysis were integrated and analyzed. Twelve schools (75%) had established courses related to patient safety. The qualitative responses suggest that patient safety education is appropriate both before and after clinical training through a variety of educational methods, and that the topics should be linked with clinical training. The challenge of securing lecture time to address patient safety was mentioned as a realistic obstacle. When patient safety education is integrated in future curriculum, it is necessary to consider it as a priority. Moreover, in the early stages of introducing patient safety education, a step-by-step, policy-based approach is required for seamless adoption and settlement.