Caracterización De Las Acciones Inseguras en Odontología (Aio) en Una Institución De Docencia-Servicio, Medellín (Colombia), 2015-2017

Trujillo-Hoyos, Mónica; Gil-Alzate, Diego; Agudelo‐Suárez, Andrés A.

doi:10.17533/udea.rfo.v30n1a8

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…14 Moreover, in a Colombian study, 541 reports were evaluated against unsafe acts in dentistry, and found that 14% of these incidents occurred in the endodontic clinics. 15 Medicine, particularly surgery, has long recognized the need to adopt patient safety initiatives by developing patient safety reporting systems to lessen the burden of iatrogenic harm. A few of the most important systems include the "World Alliance for the Safety of Patients," promoted by the WHO, and the Luxembourg Declaration of the European Union.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of reporting system for procedural errors in the endodontics departments of dental institutes of Punjab

Ameer,

Zaidi,

Aziz

et al. 2023

BioMedica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objective: Procedural error reporting system is an effective step towards patient safety. In Pakistan adverse event reporting system is deficient. The study aimed to identify the presence of procedural error reporting system and their referral in endodontic clinics of private and public dental institutes in Punjab. Methods: This study was conducted in six private and two public dental institutes in Punjab via questionnaires developed by the authors and distributed online using Google forms. The questionnaire had 14 items targeting demographics, a procedural error reporting system, and ways to manage procedural errors. Results: The majority of the dental colleges, both private and public, did not have any procedural error reporting system or a hierarchical order (70.1%) for the management of errors in their endodontic departments (60.5%). The most frequent approach was self-management of errors (86.5%), followed by referring to a senior endodontist (45%) and asking colleagues for help (36.5%). 13% of the respondents never informed patients, while 6% never reported procedural errors to their departments. There was a statistically significant difference between house officers, postgraduate trainees and demonstrators regarding self-management of errors and putting patients on follow-up. Conclusion: Most endodontic departments lack a system for reporting procedural errors, with no significant difference between private and public institutes. Most respondents report errors to patients and departments, with self-management being the most common approach. Postgraduate trainees tend to manage errors independently. It is imperative to create a comprehensive error reporting system that could be implemented progressively

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%