Narrow Results Clear All
- Communication Improvement 4
- Culture of Safety 2
- Education and Training 1
- Error Reporting and Analysis 2
- Human Factors Engineering 2
- Legal and Policy Approaches 1
- Quality Improvement Strategies 4
- Teamwork 1
- Identification Errors
- Medical Complications 2
- Medication Safety 1
- Psychological and Social Complications 1
- Surgical Complications 8
Search results for "Health Care Providers"
St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Department of Health; March 2019.
The National Quality Forum has defined 29 never events—patient safety problems that should never occur, such as wrong-site surgery and patient falls. Since 2003, Minnesota hospitals have been required to report such incidents. The 2018 report summarizes information about 384 adverse events that were reported and found pressure ulcers and invasive procedure events increased, while fall-related deaths decreased. Reports from previous years are also available.
National Priorities Partnership. Washington, DC: National Quality Forum; 2008. ISBN: 1933875194.
This report resulted from a consensus program involving 28 national organizations that sought to outline goals for improving the US health care system and share examples of such efforts in patient safety and other identified areas.
East Perth, WA, Australia: Department of Health of Western Australia; 2006.
This report shares the 2005-2006 results of Western Australia's sentinel event reporting program and documents a reduction in two types of events: wrong site/wrong part surgeries and retained foreign objects.
Journal Article > Commentary
The author explains the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations' Universal Protocol on surgical site verification in the context of its implementation in a New Jersey hospital.
Bernhard B. The Orange County Register. April 19, 2006.
This article reports on an Anaheim anesthesiologist's pre-surgery checklist, inspired by similar checklists used in the aviation industry.
Davis R. USA Today. April 17, 2006.
This article reports on a recent AHRQ-funded study on the incidence of wrong-site surgery and shares various perspectives on the issue.
Journal Article > Study
Waterman AD, Gallagher TH, Garbutt J, Waterman BM, Fraser V, Burroughs TE. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21:367-370.
This AHRQ–funded study used more than 2000 telephone interviews with recently discharged patients to demonstrate that patients who are most comfortable with error prevention were more likely to take specific action compared to those who are less comfortable. The authors report that although the majority of patients expressed comfort in asking questions about medications and general medical questions, far fewer actively engaged in marking their incision site or asking about handwashing. A past study discussed how to improve patients' perceptions of safety in hospitals, including educational interventions that might empower patients to take greater preventive action, as outlined in this study.
Legislation/Regulation > Multi-use Website
The Joint Commission.
According to an AHRQ-supported study, wrong-site surgery occurred at a rate of approximately 1 per 113,000 operations between 1985 and 2004. In July 2004, The Joint Commission enacted a Universal Protocol that was developed through expert consensus on principles and steps for preventing wrong-site, wrong-procedure, and wrong-person surgery. The Universal Protocol applies to all accredited hospitals, ambulatory care, and office-based surgery facilities. The protocol requires performing a time out prior to beginning surgery, a practice that has been shown to improve teamwork and decrease the overall risk of wrong-site surgery. This Web site includes a number of resources and facts related to the Universal Protocol. Wrong-site, wrong-procedure, and wrong-patient errors are all now considered never events by the National Quality Forum and sentinel events by The Joint Commission. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services have not reimbursed for any costs associated with these surgical errors since 2009.