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
. 2009 Sep 1:10:61.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-10-61.

A review of significant events analysed in general practice: implications for the quality and safety of patient care

Affiliations

A review of significant events analysed in general practice: implications for the quality and safety of patient care

John McKay et al. BMC Fam Pract. .

Abstract

Background: Significant event analysis (SEA) is promoted as a team-based approach to enhancing patient safety through reflective learning. Evidence of SEA participation is required for appraisal and contractual purposes in UK general practice. A voluntary educational model in the west of Scotland enables general practitioners (GPs) and doctors-in-training to submit SEA reports for feedback from trained peers. We reviewed reports to identify the range of safety issues analysed, learning needs raised and actions taken by GP teams.

Method: Content analysis of SEA reports submitted in an 18 month period between 2005 and 2007.

Results: 191 SEA reports were reviewed. 48 described patient harm (25.1%). A further 109 reports (57.1%) outlined circumstances that had the potential to cause patient harm. Individual 'error' was cited as the most common reason for event occurrence (32.5%). Learning opportunities were identified in 182 reports (95.3%) but were often non-specific professional issues not shared with the wider practice team. 154 SEA reports (80.1%) described actions taken to improve practice systems or professional behaviour. However, non-medical staff were less likely to be involved in the changes resulting from event analyses describing patient harm (p < 0.05) CONCLUSION: The study provides some evidence of the potential of SEA to improve healthcare quality and safety. If applied rigorously, GP teams and doctors in training can use the technique to investigate and learn from a wide variety of quality issues including those resulting in patient harm. This leads to reported change but it is unclear if such improvement is sustained.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Department of Health . The Stationery Office. London: Department of Health; 2001. An organisation with a memory: learning from adverse events in the NHS.
    1. Department of Health . Doing Less Harm: Improving the safety and quality of care through reporting, analysing and learning from adverse incidents involving NHS patients - Key requirements for health care provider. Department of Health, London; 2001.
    1. Brennan TA, Leape LL, Laird NM, Herbert L, Localio AR, Lawthers AG, Newhouse JP, Weiler PC, Hiatt HH. Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients. New Eng J Med. 1991;324:370–6. - PubMed
    1. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, eds . To err is human. Building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1999. pp. 1–16. - PubMed
    1. Wilson RM, Runciman WB, Gibber RW, Harrison BT, Newby L, Hamilton JD. The Quality in Australian Health Care Study. Med J Aust. 1995;163:458–71. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources