Safety hazards in cancer care: findings using three different methods

Lipczak, Henriette; Knudsen, Janne Lehmann; Nissen, Aase

doi:10.1136/bmjqs.2010.050856

Cited by 34 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In accordance with other GTT studies on cancer patients, cancer patients more often experience AEs related to hospital-acquired infections (lower respiratory infections and other infections), surgical complications and medication harm [24,25]. Adjusted for length of stay and other demographic variables, the only type of AE cancer patients experience more often is harm related to medication.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Adverse events in hospitalised cancer patients: a comparison to a general hospital population

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Patients with cancer are often treated by many healthcare providers, receive complex and potentially toxic treatments that can increase the risk for iatrogenic harm. The aim of this study is to investigate whether hospitalised cancer patients are at higher risk of adverse events (AEs) compared to a general hospital population. Material and methods: A total of 6720 patient records were retrospectively reviewed comparing AEs in hospitalised cancer patients to a general hospital population in Norway, using the IHI Global Trigger Tool method. Results: 24.2 percent of admissions for cancer patients had an AE compared to 17.4% of admissions of other patients (p < .001, rr 1.39, 95% CI 1.19-1.62). However, cancer patients did not have a higher rate of AEs per 1000 patient days compared to other patients, 37.1 vs. 36.0 (p ¼ .65, rr 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-1.18). No particular cancer category is at higher risk. The rate of AEs increases by 1.05 times for each day spent in hospital. For every year increase in age, the risk for AEs increases by 1.3%. Cancer patients more often have hospital-acquired infections, other surgical complications and AEs related to medications. Conclusions: Because of higher age, longer length of stay and surgical treatment, hospitalised cancer patients experience AEs more often than other patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Adverse events in hospitalised cancer patients: a comparison to a general hospital population

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The researchers used a combination of two methods: A GTT-based review of 527 patient records and analysis of patient safety events sent to the Danish Patient Safety Database (DPSD). They found that each method captured different types of adverse events and concluded that combination of different approaches is needed in order to get as full as possible a picture of causes of harm (Lipczak et al 2011). A much larger project was undertaken in 2008 (Center for Quality, Region of Southern Denmark 2008) with hospital-level implementation and piloting of the tool.…”

Section: Denmarkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of the Global Trigger Tool in patient safety improvement efforts: Nordic experiences

Doupi

Svaar²,

Bjørn³

et al. 2014

Cogn Tech Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Global Trigger Tool (GTT) developed by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement is a method for retrospective patient record review based on the use of 'triggers'-signals of potential adverse events that have caused patient harm. The method has the purpose of patient safety measurement and monitoring among adult inpatient populations and has been increasingly popular among Nordic countries. Use of the GTT in the Nordic area has been part of broader legal and policy actions and initiatives supportive of patient safety promotion and is being used to establish also national level estimates of patient safety incidents. Limitations of the method are its dependency on quality of documentation and the varying inter-rater reliability observed in many studies. Strengths of the GTT are its ability to detect larger numbers, as well as different types of adverse events when compared to other incident detection methods, hence it is a good addition to the palette of means for organizational patient safety monitoring. Research on reliability, usefulness and implementation approaches of the GTT, including its automation, is ongoing in the Nordic countries and is expected to generate useful input for the international patient safety community.

show abstract

“…10 See UK National Reporting and Learning System, 2015;Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 2015;Institute for Safe Medication Practices, 2015;Lipczak, Knudsen, and Nissen, 2011. …”

Section: Hotline Design and Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A decade of research on consumer engagement in patient safety has demonstrated the capacity of patients and their caregivers to identify errors and injuries experienced in the course of medical care (Institute for Safe Medication Practices, 2015; Lipczak, Knudsen, and Nissen, 2011). While patients and their proxies may sometimes be reluctant to report, especially if they believe that reporting may be futile or could alienate providers, patients have knowledge that professionals do not possess, and this information can reveal vulnerabilities in health care delivery organizations, inform and motivate improvements, and convey a degree of respect for patients and professional humility that are sometimes lacking in patient-provider interactions.…”

Section: We Urge Ahrq To Put All Of These Materials Including the Opmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing and Testing the Health Care Safety Hotline: A Prototype Consumer Reporting System for Patient Safety Events

Schneider¹,

Ridgely²,

Quigley³

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Safety hazards in cancer care: findings using three different methods

Cited by 34 publications

References 7 publications

Adverse events in hospitalised cancer patients: a comparison to a general hospital population

Adverse events in hospitalised cancer patients: a comparison to a general hospital population

Use of the Global Trigger Tool in patient safety improvement efforts: Nordic experiences

Developing and Testing the Health Care Safety Hotline: A Prototype Consumer Reporting System for Patient Safety Events

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About