Objectives:We aimed to examine the Korea National Patient Safety Incidents Inquiry conducted in the Republic of Korea; specifically, we assessed the validity of screening criteria, interreviewer reliability, quality of medical records, and the time required for reviewing medical records.Methods: A 3-stage retrospective medical record review was performed.The sensitivity and positive predictive value of the screening criteria for the adverse events were calculated, and interreviewer reliability was verified using the overall agreement rate and κ value. In addition, the results of medical record quality assessment and time required for review were analyzed.Results: There were a total of 4159 patients (55.5%) with at least 1 of the 41 screening criteria. In stage 1, the overall percent of agreement was 81.9% when all negatives from the 2 reviewers were included, and the κ value was 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.66). In stage 2, 84.6% of cases were a perfect match, and 87.4% were a partial match. The κ values were 0.159 (95% CI, 0.12-0.20) and 0.389 (95% CI, 0.35-0.43), respectively. The mean quality assessment scores were 3.18 of 4 points in stage 1 and 3.05 of 4 points in stage 2. In stage 1, it took an average of 13.02 minutes to asses each patient file; in stage 2, it took an average of 5.06 minutes. Conclusions:To increase the feasibility of medical record review for detecting adverse events, it is important not only to improve the reliability between reviewers but also to monitor the quality of medical records and the time required for review.

In 2019, the Korean National Patient Safety Incidents Inquiry was conducted in the Republic of Korea to identify the national-level incidence of adverse events. This study determined the incidence and detailed the characteristics of adverse events at 15 regional public hospitals in the Republic of Korea.Methods: Medical records data of 500 randomly selected patients (discharged in 2016) were extracted from each of the 15 studied hospitals and reviewed in 3 stages. First, for each hospital, 2 nurses independently reviewed the medical records, using 41 screening criteria. Second, 2 physicians independently reviewed the records of those patients with at least 1 screening criterion from the first stage for adverse events occurrence and their characteristics. Third, a 9-member committee conducted a final review and compiled the final adverse event report.Results: Among 7500 patients, 4159 (55.5%) had at least 1 screening criterion; 745 (9.9%) experienced 901 adverse events (incidence, 12.0%). By type of institution, adverse event incidence varied widely from 1.2% to 45.6%. In 1032 adverse events, the majority (33.5%) were "patient carerelated." By severity, the majority (638; 70.8%) were temporary, requiring intervention, whereas 38 (4.2%) resulted in death. The preventability score was high for "patient care-related" and "diagnosis-related" adverse events. Duration of hospitalization was extended for 463 (44.9%) adverse events, with "diagnosis-related" (30.8%) and "surgery/procedural-related" (30.1%) types extended by at least 21 days.Conclusions: A review of medical records aids in identifying adverse events in medical institutions with varying characteristics, thus helping prioritize interventions to reduce their incidence.