New safety study quantifies medical errors in Canadian hospitals
http://www.100md.com
《英国医生杂志》
The first national study in Canada of the safety of hospital patients estimates that one in 13 people (7.5%) hospitalised have experienced an adverse event as a result of their care.
Researchers from seven Canadian universities analysed data on adverse events from 3745 adult patients?charts, randomly selected from 20 acute care hospitals in five provinces (CMAJ 2004;170:1678-86). They described an adverse event as 揳n unintended injury or complication resulting in death, disability or prolonged hospital stay caused by health care management rather than the patient抯 underlying condition.?/p>
Of the 255 adverse events, 65% resulted in no physical impairment or disability or in minimal or moderate impairment with recovery in 12 months or less. However, 5% of adverse events resulted in permanent disability. Also, the researchers concluded that 1.6% of people hospitalised in Canadian hospitals in 2000 were judged to have died because of an adverse event.
Surgical care accounted for the largest number of adverse events. Close to 37% of adverse events were potentially preventable.
揙ur study indicates that care in Canadian hospitals is safe for the vast majority of patients,?said one of the authors, Ross Baker, professor of health policy, management, and evaluation at the University of Toronto. 揌owever, certain patients are experiencing injuries and complications related to their care, some preventable.?/p>
The percentage of adverse events in Canada is higher than the percentages found in two earlier studies in the United States (2.9% and 3.7%) and lower than those found in similar studies in Britain (10.8%), Australia (16.6%), and New Zealand (12.9%). The study抯 authors think that this variation is at least partly explained by differences in study methods. For instance, the United States studies looked at incidents of negligence, not harm.
The Canadian adverse events study looked at medical mistakes in teaching hospitals, large hospitals, and small hospitals. Like similar studies, it found that adverse events occur more often in teaching hospitals, even after adjustment for patients?disease status. However, the rate of preventable adverse events was the same in all three kinds of hospital.
揑 think that抯 an important message for Canada,?said Dr Peter Norton, head of family medicine at the University of Calgary and joint principal investigator for the study. 揑t抯 a good news story. We should support this structure we抳e built and help all our hospitals get better梕ven if the solutions aren抰 the same.?/p>
揂ll of us as healthcare professionals want the best outcomes for our patients,?said Dr Robert Wedel, president of the College of Family Physicians of Canada. 揥e welcome this increasing focus on patient safety . . . We also welcome the move from a focus on human error in healthcare to a focus on system error and how we can improve health system processes within and outside hospitals.(Toronto Barbara Kermode-S)
Researchers from seven Canadian universities analysed data on adverse events from 3745 adult patients?charts, randomly selected from 20 acute care hospitals in five provinces (CMAJ 2004;170:1678-86). They described an adverse event as 揳n unintended injury or complication resulting in death, disability or prolonged hospital stay caused by health care management rather than the patient抯 underlying condition.?/p>
Of the 255 adverse events, 65% resulted in no physical impairment or disability or in minimal or moderate impairment with recovery in 12 months or less. However, 5% of adverse events resulted in permanent disability. Also, the researchers concluded that 1.6% of people hospitalised in Canadian hospitals in 2000 were judged to have died because of an adverse event.
Surgical care accounted for the largest number of adverse events. Close to 37% of adverse events were potentially preventable.
揙ur study indicates that care in Canadian hospitals is safe for the vast majority of patients,?said one of the authors, Ross Baker, professor of health policy, management, and evaluation at the University of Toronto. 揌owever, certain patients are experiencing injuries and complications related to their care, some preventable.?/p>
The percentage of adverse events in Canada is higher than the percentages found in two earlier studies in the United States (2.9% and 3.7%) and lower than those found in similar studies in Britain (10.8%), Australia (16.6%), and New Zealand (12.9%). The study抯 authors think that this variation is at least partly explained by differences in study methods. For instance, the United States studies looked at incidents of negligence, not harm.
The Canadian adverse events study looked at medical mistakes in teaching hospitals, large hospitals, and small hospitals. Like similar studies, it found that adverse events occur more often in teaching hospitals, even after adjustment for patients?disease status. However, the rate of preventable adverse events was the same in all three kinds of hospital.
揑 think that抯 an important message for Canada,?said Dr Peter Norton, head of family medicine at the University of Calgary and joint principal investigator for the study. 揑t抯 a good news story. We should support this structure we抳e built and help all our hospitals get better梕ven if the solutions aren抰 the same.?/p>
揂ll of us as healthcare professionals want the best outcomes for our patients,?said Dr Robert Wedel, president of the College of Family Physicians of Canada. 揥e welcome this increasing focus on patient safety . . . We also welcome the move from a focus on human error in healthcare to a focus on system error and how we can improve health system processes within and outside hospitals.(Toronto Barbara Kermode-S)