BackgroundWe need to know the scale and underlying causes of surgical adverse events (AEs) in order to improve the safety of care in surgical units. However, there is little recent data. Previous record review studies that reported on surgical AEs in detail are now more than ten years old. Since then surgical technology and quality assurance have changed rapidly. The objective of this study was to provide more recent data on the incidence, consequences, preventability, causes and potential strategies to prevent AEs among hospitalized patients in surgical units.MethodsA structured record review study of 7,926 patient records was carried out by trained nurses and medical specialist reviewers in 21 Dutch hospitals. The aim was to determine the presence of AEs during hospitalizations in 2004 and to consider how far they could be prevented. Of all AEs, the consequences, responsible medical specialty, causes and potential prevention strategies were identified. Surgical AEs were defined as AEs attributable to surgical treatment and care processes and were selected for analysis in detail.ResultsSurgical AEs occurred in 3.6% of hospital admissions and represented 65% of all AEs. Forty-one percent of the surgical AEs was considered to be preventable. The consequences of surgical AEs were more severe than for other types of AEs, resulting in more permanent disability, extra treatment, prolonged hospital stay, unplanned readmissions and extra outpatient visits. Almost 40% of the surgical AEs were infections, 23% bleeding, and 22% injury by mechanical, physical or chemical cause. Human factors were involved in the causation of 65% of surgical AEs and were considered to be preventable through quality assurance and training.ConclusionsSurgical AEs occur more often than other types of AEs, are more often preventable and their consequences are more severe. Therefore, surgical AEs have a major impact on the burden of AEs during hospitalizations. These findings concur with the results from previous studies. However, evidence-based solutions to reduce surgical AEs are increasingly available. Interventions directed at human causes are recommended to improve the safety of surgical care. Examples are team training and the surgical safety checklist. In addition, specific strategies are needed to improve appropriate use of antibiotic prophylaxis and sustainable implementation of hygiene guidelines to reduce infections.

High quality handovers are essential for safe healthcare and are used in many clinical situations. Miscommunication during handovers can lead to unnecessary diagnostic delays, patients not receiving required treatment, and medication errors. 1 Miscommunication is one of the leading causes for adverse events resulting in death or serious injury to patients. 2 The process of handovers can be improved, and the aim of this article is to provide practical guidance for clinicians on how to do this better. How to do it betterChanging handover practice at an organisational level is complicated and requires effective strategies for implementation, reinforcement, and education on why it is important. [11][12][13][14][15][16][17] Nevertheless, everyone can work on their handover practice by taking some practical steps that are relevant to all types of handovers. These include• Assessing the key people that need to be involved in the handover (physicians, nurses, and patients and their carers)• Choosing a calm environment with minimal distractions• Using a structured format such as SBAR

BackgroundAn unplanned ICU admission of an inpatient is a serious adverse event (SAE). So far, no in depth-study has been performed to systematically analyse the root causes of unplanned ICU-admissions. The primary aim of this study was to identify the healthcare worker-, organisational-, technical,- disease- and patient- related causes that contribute to acute unplanned ICU admissions from general wards using a Root-Cause Analysis Tool called PRISMA-medical. Although a Track and Trigger System (MEWS) was introduced in our hospital a few years ago, it was implemented without a clear protocol. Therefore, the secondary aim was to assess the adherence to a Track and Trigger system to identify deterioration on general hospital wards in patients eventually transferred to the ICU.MethodsRetrospective observational study in 49 consecutive adult patients acutely admitted to the Intensive Care Unit from a general nursing ward. 1. PRISMA-analysis on root causes of unplanned ICU admissions 2. Assessment of protocol adherence to the early warning score system.ResultsOut of 49 cases, 156 root causes were identified. The most frequent root causes were healthcare worker related (46%), which were mainly failures in monitoring the patient. They were followed by disease-related (45%), patient-related causes (7, 5%), and organisational root causes (3%). In only 40% of the patients vital parameters were monitored as was instructed by the doctor. 477 vital parameter sets were found in the 48 hours before ICU admission, in only 1% a correct MEWS was explicitly documented in the record.ConclusionsThis in-depth analysis demonstrates that almost half of the unplanned ICU admissions from the general ward had healthcare worker related root causes, mostly due to monitoring failures in clinically deteriorating patients. In order to reduce unplanned ICU admissions, improving the monitoring of patients is therefore warranted.

No abstract

BackgroundEmergency department (ED) crowding is common and associated with increased costs and negative patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to conduct an in-depth analysis to identify the root causes of an ED length of stay (ED-LOS) of more than six hours.MethodsAn observational retrospective record review study was conducted to analyse the causes for ED-LOS of more than six hours during a one-week period in an academic hospital in the Netherlands. Basic administrative data were collected for all visiting patients. A root cause analysis was conducted using the PRISMA-method for patients with an ED-LOS > 6 hours, excluding children and critical care room presentations.Results568 patients visited the ED during the selected week (January 2017). Eighty-four patients (15%) had an ED-LOS > 6 hours and a PRISMA-analysis was performed in 74 (88%) of these patients. 269 root causes were identified, 216 (76%) of which were organisational and 53 (22%) patient or disease related. 207 (94%) of the organisational factors were outside the influence of the ED. Descriptive statistics showed a mean number of 2,5 consultations, 59% hospital admissions or transfers and a mean age of 57 years in the ED-LOS > 6 hours group. For the total group, there was a mean number of 1,9 consultations, 29% hospital admissions or transfers and a mean age of 43 years.ConclusionsThis study showed that the root causes for an increased ED-LOS were mostly organisational and beyond the control of the ED. These results confirm that interventions addressing the complete acute care chain are needed in order to reduce ED-LOS and crowding in ED’s.