Adverse events in acute care: An integrative literature review

Kellogg, Victoria; Havens, Donna Sullivan

doi:10.1002/nur.10103

Cited by 18 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 85 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The data extracted from each of the 21 selected articles were entered into SPSS 11.0 to compute descriptive statistics. Characteristics of these articles are described following the format used by Kellogg and Havens (2003), which classifies articles based on year of publication, country where research was conducted, discipline (type of journal), and data sources. In addition, we elected to examine the study design as well as sample size for each of the studies that were reviewed.…”

Section: Sample Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health-related research on older inmates: An integrative review

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature on older inmates' health is fragmented and insufficiently developed. In this integrative review, 21 research articles on health and older inmates were identified, critiqued, and synthesized to determine: the minimum age criterion most commonly used; health-related variables explored; health status; the health impact of incarceration; and aging-specific policies, programs, and facilities. Age 50 and older was used most often. The top three health variables were psychiatric conditions, physical illnesses, and substance abuse. Self-reports of health status varied across studies; however, inmates consistently reported health declines since incarceration. Older inmates' health needs appear often to be left unmet. Nursing investigations are needed leading to practice innovations to enhance prisoners' self-management to reduce disease burden and fiscal and societal costs.

show abstract

Section: Sample Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health-related research on older inmates: An integrative review

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prospective AE surveillance is one approach to methodical measurement that has the potential to overcome the well-documented limitations of other methods of AE detection 12–24. In this method, patients and providers are observed by a trained observer to detect specific outcomes or processes (collectively called triggers) 25–28.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of a multisite prospective adverse event surveillance system

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWe have designed a prospective adverse event (AE) surveillance method. We performed this study to evaluate this method’s performance in several hospitals simultaneously.ObjectivesTo compare AE rates obtained by prospective AE surveillance in different hospitals and to evaluate measurement factors explaining observed variation.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre prospective observational study. Prospective AE surveillance was implemented for 8 weeks on the general medicine wards of five hospitals. To determine if population factors may have influenced results, we performed mixed-effects logistic regression. To determine if surveillance factors may have influenced results, we reassigned observers to different hospitals midway through surveillance period and reallocated a random sample of events to different expert review teams.ResultsDuring 3560 patient days of observation of 1159 patient encounters, we identified 356 AEs (AE risk per encounter=22%). AE risk varied between hospitals ranging from 9.9% of encounters in Hospital D to 35.8% of encounters in Hospital A. AE types and severity were similar between hospitals—the most common types were related to clinical procedures (45%), hospital-acquired infections (21%) and medications (19%). Adjusting for age and comorbid status, we observed an association between hospital and AE risk. We observed variation in observer behaviour and moderate agreement between clinical reviewers, which could have influenced the observed rate difference.ConclusionThis study demonstrated that it is possible to implement prospective surveillance in different settings. Such surveillance appears to be better suited to evaluating hospital safety concerns within rather than between hospitals as we could not definitively rule out whether the observed variation in AE risk was due to population or surveillance factors.

show abstract

“…A range of methods are available for identifying adverse events before or after they happen, such as a manual method, and information technology methods 3 ; cross-sectional, prospective and retrospective methods 2 ; monitoring or screening the patients' clinical records, or self-reported incidents by healthcare professionals, use of computer systems, and case studies (Walshe, cited in Kellogg & Havens, 2003). 7 The purpose of this paper is to compare the strengths and weaknesses of several methods of identifying adverse events in hospital, including medical records reviews, self-reported incidents, information technology, and patient selfreports. It will be argued that each method has its weakness, thus hospitals should combine more than one method to obtain more effective results in identifying adverse events.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Four Methods to Detect Adverse Events in Hospital

Dhamanti¹

2015

MKA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstrakDeteksi terjadinya kejadian yang tidak diharapkan (KTD) telah menjadi salah satu tantangan dalam keselamatan pasien oleh karena itu metode untuk mendeteksi terjadinya KTD sangatlah penting untuk meningkatkan keselamatan pasien. Tujuan dari artikel ini adalah untuk membandingkan kelebihan dan kekurangan dari beberapa metode untuk mendeteksi terjadinya KTD di rumah sakit, meliputi review rekam medis, pelaporan insiden secara mandiri, teknologi informasi, dan pelaporan oleh pasien. Studi ini merupakan kajian literatur untuk membandingkan dan menganalisa metode terbaik untuk mendeteksi KTD yang dapat diimplementasikan oleh rumah sakit. Semua dari empat metode telah terbukti mampu untuk mendeteksi terjadinya KTD di rumah sakit, tetapi masing-masing metode mempunyai kelebihan dan kekurangan yang perlu diatasi. Tidak ada satu metode terbaik yang akan memberikan hasil terbaik untuk mendeteksi KTD di rumah sakit. Sehingga untuk mendeteksi lebih banyak KTD yang seharusnya dapat dicegah, atau KTD yang telah terjadi, rumah sakit seharusnya mengkombinasikan lebih dari satu metode untuk mendeteksi, karena masing-masing metode mempunyai sensitivitas berbedabeda.

show abstract

Adverse events in acute care: An integrative literature review

Cited by 18 publications

References 85 publications

Health-related research on older inmates: An integrative review

Health-related research on older inmates: An integrative review

Study of a multisite prospective adverse event surveillance system

Comparison of Four Methods to Detect Adverse Events in Hospital

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About