Experiences from ten years of incident reporting in health care: a qualitative study among department managers and coordinators
- PMID: 29444680
- PMCID: PMC5813432
- DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-2876-5
Experiences from ten years of incident reporting in health care: a qualitative study among department managers and coordinators
Abstract
Background: Incident reporting (IR) in health care has been advocated as a means to improve patient safety. The purpose of IR is to identify safety hazards and develop interventions to mitigate these hazards in order to reduce harm in health care. Using qualitative methods is a way to reveal how IR is used and perceived in health care practice. The aim of the present study was to explore the experiences of IR from two different perspectives, including heads of departments and IR coordinators, to better understand how they value the practice and their thoughts regarding future application.
Methods: Data collection was performed in Östergötland County, Sweden, where an electronic IR system was implemented in 2004, and the authorities explicitly have advocated IR from that date. A purposive sample of nine heads of departments from three hospitals were interviewed, and two focus group discussions with IR coordinators took place. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis.
Results: Two main themes emerged from the data: "Incident reporting has come to stay" building on the categories entitled perceived advantages, observed changes and value of the IR system, and "Remaining challenges in incident reporting" including the categories entitled need for action, encouraged learning, continuous culture improvement, IR system development and proper use of IR.
Conclusions: After 10 years, the practice of IR is widely accepted in the selected setting. IR has helped to put patient safety on the agenda, and a cultural change towards no blame has been observed. The informants suggest an increased focus on action, and further development of the tools for reporting and handling incidents.
Keywords: Incident reporting; Patient safety; Qualitative research.
Conflict of interest statement
Ethics approval and consent to participate
The study was approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board in Linköping, Sweden, Dnr 2013/411–31. Oral consent to participate was obtained from the informants at each focus group discussion or interview.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests. SC acts as an Associate Editor for BMC Health Services Research.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
-
- Khon L, Corrigan J, Donaldson M, editors. To err is human: building a safer health system. Committee on quality of health in America, Institute of Medicine. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 1999. pp. 86–101. - PubMed
-
- Levinson DR. Hospital incident reporting systems do not capture most patient harm. Dep Health Hum Serv. 2012; Available at http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-06-09-00091.pdf. Accessed 15 Jan 2017.
-
- Espin S, Carter C, Janes N, et al. Exploring health care professionals’ perceptions of incidents and incident reporting in rehabilitation settings. J Patient Saf. 2015. [Epub ahead of print]; 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000214. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials