Classifying laboratory incident reports to identify problems that jeopardize patient safety
- PMID: 12866368
- DOI: 10.1309/8EXC-CM6Y-R1TH-UBAF
Classifying laboratory incident reports to identify problems that jeopardize patient safety
Abstract
We developed a laboratory incident report classification system that can guide reduction of actual and potential adverse events. The system was applied retrospectively to 129 incident reports occurring during a 16-month period. Incidents were classified by type of adverse event (actual or potential), specific and potential patient impact, nature of laboratory involvement, testing phase, and preventability. Of 129 incidents, 95% were potential adverse events. The most common specific impact was delay in receiving test results (85%). The average potential impact was 2.9 (SD, 1.0; median, 3; scale, 1-5). The laboratory alone was responsible for 60% of the incidents; 21% were due solely to problems outside the laboratory's authority. The laboratory function most frequently implicated in incidents was specimen processing (31%). The preanalytic testing phase was involved in 71% of incidents, the analytic in 18%, and the postanalytic in 11%. The most common preanalytic problem was specimen transportation (16%). The average preventability score was 4.0 (range, 1-5; median, 4; scale, 1-5), and 94 incidents (73%) were preventable (score, 3 or more). Of the 94 preventable incidents, 30% involved cognitive errors, defined as incorrect choices caused by insufficient knowledge, and 73% involved noncognitive errors, defined as inadvertent or unconscious lapses in expected automatic behavior.
Similar articles
-
What can we learn about patient safety from information sources within an acute hospital: a step on the ladder of integrated risk management?Qual Saf Health Care. 2008 Jun;17(3):209-15. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2006.020008. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008. PMID: 18519628
-
Incident reporting in one UK accident and emergency department.Accid Emerg Nurs. 2006 Jan;14(1):27-37. doi: 10.1016/j.aaen.2005.10.001. Accid Emerg Nurs. 2006. PMID: 16321534
-
Toward learning from patient safety reporting systems.J Crit Care. 2006 Dec;21(4):305-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2006.07.001. J Crit Care. 2006. PMID: 17175416
-
The laboratory is a key partner in assuring patient safety.Clin Lab Med. 2004 Dec;24(4):1023-35. doi: 10.1016/j.cll.2004.05.017. Clin Lab Med. 2004. PMID: 15555754 Review.
-
Medical errors: impact on clinical laboratories and other critical areas.Clin Biochem. 2004 Dec;37(12):1052-62. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2004.08.009. Clin Biochem. 2004. PMID: 15589810 Review.
Cited by
-
A cross-sectional mixed methods study protocol to generate learning from patient safety incidents reported from general practice.BMJ Open. 2015 Dec 1;5(12):e009079. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009079. BMJ Open. 2015. PMID: 26628526 Free PMC article.
-
Managing the pre- and post-analytical phases of the total testing process.Ann Lab Med. 2012 Jan;32(1):5-16. doi: 10.3343/alm.2012.32.1.5. Epub 2011 Dec 20. Ann Lab Med. 2012. PMID: 22259773 Free PMC article. Review.
-
No preanalytical errors in laboratory testing: a beneficial aspect for patients.Indian J Clin Biochem. 2012 Oct;27(4):319-21. doi: 10.1007/s12291-012-0271-2. Indian J Clin Biochem. 2012. PMID: 24082454 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Prevalence and types of preanalytical error in hematology laboratory of a tertiary care hospital in South India.J Lab Physicians. 2018 Apr-Jun;10(2):237-240. doi: 10.4103/JLP.JLP_98_17. J Lab Physicians. 2018. PMID: 29692594 Free PMC article.
-
The effect of different protease inhibitors on stability of parathyroid hormone, insulin, and prolactin levels under different lag times and storage conditions until analysis.J Clin Lab Anal. 2017 Nov;31(6):e22144. doi: 10.1002/jcla.22144. Epub 2017 Jan 30. J Clin Lab Anal. 2017. PMID: 28133791 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical