Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2008 Jun 15:9:35.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-9-35.

Mix of methods is needed to identify adverse events in general practice: a prospective observational study

Raymond Wetzels  1 , René Wolters, Chris van Weel, Michel Wensing
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Mix of methods is needed to identify adverse events in general practice: a prospective observational study

Raymond Wetzels et al. BMC Fam Pract. .

Abstract

Background: The validity and usefulness of incident reporting and other methods for identifying adverse events remains unclear. This study aimed to compare five methods in general practice.

Methods: In a prospective observational study, with five general practitioners, five methods were applied and compared. The five methods were physician reported adverse events, pharmacist reported adverse events, patients' experiences of adverse events, assessment of a random sample of medical records, and assessment of all deceased patients.

Results: A total of 68 events were identified using these methods. The patient survey accounted for the highest number of events and the pharmacist reports for the lowest number. No overlap between the methods was detected. The patient survey accounted for the highest number of events and the pharmacist reports for the lowest number.

Conclusion: A mix of methods is needed to identify adverse events in general practice.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Green LA, Fryer GE, Jr, Yawn BP, Lanier D, Dovey SM. The ecology of medical care revisited. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:2021–2025. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200106283442611. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sandars J, Esmail A. The frequency and nature of medical error in primary care: understanding the diversity across studies. Fam Pract. 2003;20:231–236. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmg301. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mikkelsen TH, Sokolowski I, Olesen F. General practitioners' attitudes toward reporting and learning from adverse events: results from a survey. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2006;24:27–32. doi: 10.1080/02813430500508330. - DOI - PubMed
    1. WHO Strengths and weaknesses of available methods for assessing the nature and scale of harm caused by the health system: a systematic literature review. Geneva. 2003.
    1. Britt H, Miller GC, Steven ID, Howarth GC, Nicholson PA, Bhasale AL, Norton KJ. Collecting data on adverse events: a method for monitoring incidents in general practice. Fam Pract. 1997;14:101–6. doi: 10.1093/fampra/14.2.101. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources