doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20147.x.
Measuring errors and adverse events in health care
Affiliations
- PMID: 12534766
- PMCID: PMC1494808
- DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20147.x
Item in Clipboard
Measuring errors and adverse events in health care
J Gen Intern Med.
2003 Jan.
Abstract
In this paper, we identify 8 methods used to measure errors and adverse events in health care and discuss their strengths and weaknesses. We focus on the reliability and validity of each, as well as the ability to detect latent errors (or system errors) versus active errors and adverse events. We propose a general framework to help health care providers, researchers, and administrators choose the most appropriate methods to meet their patient safety measurement goals.
Figures
The relative utility of methods for measuring latent errors, active errors, and adverse events.
Comment in
-
Remedies needed to address the pathology in reporting adverse reactions and Food and Drug Administration use of reports.J Gen Intern Med. 2003 Jan;18(1):72-3. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.t01-1-21115.x. J Gen Intern Med. 2003. PMID: 12534769 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
References
-
- Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, editors. To Err is Human. Washington DC: National Academy Press; 1999. - PubMed
-
- Expert Group on Learning from Adverse Events in the NHS. An Organisation With a Memory. London: Stationery Office; 2000.
-
- Bates DW, Gawande AA. Error in medicine: what have we learned. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:763–7. - PubMed
-
- Brennan TA. The Institute of Medicine report on medical errors—could it do harm? N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1123–5. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources