Evaluation of two methods for quality improvement in intensive care: Facilitated incident monitoring and retrospective medical chart review*

Abstract

FIM provided more contextual information about incidents and identified a larger number and higher proportion of preventable problems than MCR, but FIM identified few iatrogenic infections, problems with pain management, or problems leading to ICU admission. FIM is easily incorporated into the clinical routine. This study suggests that incident monitoring may be more useful for identifying quality problems, and it could be supplemented by selective audits and focused MCR to detect problems not reported well by FIM.

Critical incidents in paediatric critical care: who is at risk?

“…While these advances are generally regarded as positive, this progress has introduced many invasive procedures that have the potential of causing harm to the patient. Moreover, the involvement of various physicians and nurses in patients' care in an intensive care unit necessitates effective communication between the different specialties [1,4,17]. The intensivist has an important coordinating role in this environment [2].…”

Fehlerentstehung und Fehlerprävention auf Intensivstationen

“…Zur Erfassung von Fehlern an Intensivstationen sind verschiedene Methoden beschrieben worden, keine davon wird jedoch in der Lage sein, die absolute Fehlerhäufigkeit zu erfassen und die Ergebnisse werden je nach Methode unterschiedlich sein [4].…”

Improved Clinical Outcomes Combining House Staff Self-Assessment with an Audit-Based Quality Improvement Program

“…Audits of medical records are commonly used in quality improvement initiatives to assess hospital performance and effect change [8][9][10] . The medical record provides insight into specific components of patient care including physician and nursing care, ancillary support services, and if polices and procedures are being followed.…”