The Use of Categorized Time-Trend Reporting of Radiation Oncology Incidents: A Proactive Analytical Approach to Improving Quality and Safety Over Time

Arnold, Anthony; Delaney, Geoff P.; Cassapi, Lynette; Bartoň, Michael

doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.02.029

Cited by 40 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Unsafe conditions are circumstances that increase the probability of a patient safety event from occurring. 6 Within radiation oncology there is evidence that incident learning results in fewer serious safety events over time [7][8][9] . For example, one radiation oncology group reports a >30% reduction in A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

RO-ILS: Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System: A report from the first year of experience

Hoopes

Dicker

Eads

et al. 2015

Practical Radiation Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

RO-ILS: Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System: A report from the first year of experience

Hoopes

Dicker

Eads

et al. 2015

Practical Radiation Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Incident monitoring is available in each Australian state, but no national system for radiation oncology monitoring is in place. An appendix was added to the standards to give an example for an incident reporting system based on the work by Arnold et al [9].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Development of Practice Standards for Radiation Oncology in Australia: A Tripartite Approach

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Improper performance claims also carried the highest average indemnity payment among the most frequent alleged errors. Reported error rates in radiation therapy are low (fewer than 2% of treatments) 23–29 , and studies suggest these events are decreasing over time 30,31 along with malpractice claims against radiation oncologists 13 . When errors do occur, most relate to human error or human-software interface 25,28,32 , especially among incidents with the potential to cause serious clinical harm 31 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When errors do occur, most relate to human error or human-software interface 25,28,32 , especially among incidents with the potential to cause serious clinical harm 31 . Treatment planning and delivery is complex and requires coordination among multiple physicians, personnel, and systems 30 . While advances in radiation techniques and technology can reduce radiation-related errors 27 , increased treatment complexity can introduce new pathways for error 5,31,33 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nature of Medical Malpractice Claims Against Radiation Oncologists

Marshall

Tringale

Connor

et al. 2017

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose/Objective(s) We examined characteristics of medical malpractice claims involving radiation oncologists closed during a 10-year period. Methods and Materials Malpractice claims filed against radiation oncologists from 2003 to 2012 collected by a nationwide liability insurance trade association were analyzed. Outcomes included the nature of claims and indemnity payments, including associated presenting diagnoses, procedures, alleged medical errors, and injury severity. We compared the likelihood of a claim resulting in payment in relation to injury severity categories (death as referent) using binomial logistic regression. Results There were 362 closed claims involving radiation oncology, 102 (28%) of which were paid, resulting in $38 million in indemnity payments. The most common alleged errors included: ‘improper performance’ (38% of closed claims, 18% were paid; 29% [$11 million] of total indemnity); ‘errors in diagnosis’ (25% of closed claims, 46% were paid; 44% [$17 million] of total indemnity); and, ‘no medical misadventure’ (14% of closed claims, 8% were paid; less than 1% [$148,000] of total indemnity). Another physician was named in 32% of claims, and consent issues/breach of contract were cited in 18%. Claims for injury resulting in death represented 39% of closed claims and 25% of total indemnity. ‘Improper performance’ was the primary alleged error associated with injury resulting in death. Compared to claims involving death, major temporary injury (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.29–5.85, P=0.009), significant permanent injury (OR 3.1, 1.48–6.46, P =0.003) and major permanent injury (OR 5.5, 1.89–16.15, P =0.002) had higher likelihood of a claim resulting in indemnity payment. Conclusions Improper performance was the most common alleged malpractice error. Claims involving significant or major injury were more likely to be paid than those involving death. Insights into the nature of liability claims against radiation oncologists may help direct efforts to improve quality of care and minimize the risk of being sued.

show abstract

The Use of Categorized Time-Trend Reporting of Radiation Oncology Incidents: A Proactive Analytical Approach to Improving Quality and Safety Over Time

Cited by 40 publications

References 33 publications

RO-ILS: Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System: A report from the first year of experience

RO-ILS: Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System: A report from the first year of experience

The Development of Practice Standards for Radiation Oncology in Australia: A Tripartite Approach

Nature of Medical Malpractice Claims Against Radiation Oncologists

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About