Article

Feasibility and reliability of PRISMA-Medical for specialty-based incident analysis

VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdamo, North Holland, Netherlands
Quality and Safety in Health Care (Impact Factor: 2.16). 12/2009; 18(6):486-91. DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2008.028068
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In this study, the feasibility and reliability of the Prevention Recovery Information System for Monitoring and Analysis (PRISMA)-Medical method for systematic, specialty-based analysis and classification of incidents in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) were determined.
After the introduction of a Neonatology System for Analysis and Feedback on Medical Events (NEOSAFE) in eight tertiary care NICUs and one paediatric surgical ICU, PRISMA-Medical was started to be used to identify root causes of voluntary reported incidents by multidisciplinary unit patient safety committees. Committee members were PRISMA-trained and familiar with the department and its processes. In this study, the results of PRISMA-analysis of incidents reported during the first year are described. At t = 3 months and t = 12 months after introduction, test cases were performed to measure agreement at three levels of root cause classification using PRISMA-Medical. Inter-rater reliability was determined by calculating generalised kappa values for each level of classification.
During the study period, 981 out of 1786 eligible incidents (55%) were analysed for underlying root causes. In total, 2313 root causes were identified and classified, giving an average of 2.4 root causes for every incident. Although substantial agreement (kappa 0.70-0.81) was reached at the main level of root cause classification of the test cases (discrimination between technical, organisational and human failure) and agreement among the committees at the second level (discrimination between skill-based, rule-based and knowledge-based errors) was acceptable (kappa 0.53-0.59), discrimination between rule-based errors (the third level of classification) was more difficult to assess (kappa 0.40-0.47).
With some restraints, PRISMA-Medical proves to be both feasible and acceptably reliable to identify and classify multiple causes of medical events in the NICU.

Full-text

Available from: Richard A van Lingen, May 29, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
175 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objectives of this study were to identify causal and contributing factors of serious patient safety incidents in a paediatric university hospital, to report on ensuing recommendations and to assess the extent of implementation of the recommendations. The possible causal and contributing factors identified in 17 incidents were classified by a system devised by Vincent et al. Proposed recommendations were classified by the same system, and degrees of implementation were established. A median of 5 causal and contributing factors per incident were identified. Twenty-two percent of all factors were related to teamwork and 22 % to task factors. A median of 5 recommendations per analysis were formulated. Most recommendations were related to task factors (36 %). The time load of each analysis was a mean of 27 h. One third of the recommendations have been acted upon, mostly those related to task and team factors. Conclusion: Incident analysis is time-consuming but yields indispensable information on causal and contributing factors, presenting numerous opportunities for quality improvement. The value of these analyses could be improved by appointing responsibilities and setting up time frames for implementation. A bottom-up approach with managerial support appears to be a key to turning incident analysis and quality improvement into an ongoing process.
    European Journal of Pediatrics 05/2014; 173(11). DOI:10.1007/s00431-014-2341-3 · 1.98 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The paper summarises previous theories of accident causation, human error, foresight, resilience and system migration. Five lessons from these theories are used as the foundation for a new model which describes how patient safety emerges in complex systems like healthcare: the System Evolution Erosion and Enhancement model. It is concluded that to improve patient safety, healthcare organisations need to understand how system evolution both enhances and erodes patient safety. Significance for public healthThe article identifies lessons from previous theories of human error and accident causation, foresight, resilience engineering and system migration and introduces a new framework for understanding patient safety in healthcare; the System Evolution, Erosion and Enhancement (SEEE) model. The article is significant for public health because healthcare organizations around the world need to understand how safety evolves and erodes to develop and implement interventions to reduce patient harm.
    12/2013; 2(3):e25. DOI:10.4081/jphr.2013.e25
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Prospective risk analysis (PRA) is an essential element in quality assurance for clinical laboratories. Practical approaches to conducting PRA in laboratories, however, are scarce. On the basis of the classical Failure Mode and Effect Analysis method, an approach to PRA was developed for application to key laboratory processes. First, the separate, major steps of the process under investigation are identified. Scores are then given for the Probability (P) and Consequence (C) of predefined types of failures and the chances of Detecting (D) these failures. Based on the P and C scores (on a 10-point scale), an overall Risk score (R) is calculated. The scores for each process were recorded in a matrix table. Based on predetermined criteria for R and D, it was determined whether a more detailed analysis was required for potential failures and, ultimately, where risk-reducing measures were necessary, if any. As an illustration, this paper presents the results of the application of PRA to our pre-analytical and analytical activities. The highest R scores were obtained in the stat processes, the most common failure type in the collective process steps was 'delayed processing or analysis', the failure type with the highest mean R score was 'inappropriate analysis' and the failure type most frequently rated as suboptimal was 'identification error'. The PRA designed is a useful semi-objective tool to identify process steps with potential failures rated as risky. Its systematic design and convenient output in matrix tables makes it easy to perform, practical and transparent.
    Annals of Clinical Biochemistry 02/2014; 51(6). DOI:10.1177/0004563214521160 · 2.08 Impact Factor