An International Perspective on Definitions and Terminology Used to Describe Serious Reportable Patient Safety Incidents: A Systematic Review
- PMID: 32271529
- PMCID: PMC8612884
- DOI: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000700
An International Perspective on Definitions and Terminology Used to Describe Serious Reportable Patient Safety Incidents: A Systematic Review
Abstract
Objectives: Patients are unintentionally, yet frequently, harmed in situations that are deemed preventable. Incident reporting systems help prevent harm, yet there is considerable variability in how patient safety incidents are reported. This may lead to inconsistent or unnecessary patterns of incident reporting and failures to identify serious patient safety incidents. This systematic review aims to describe international approaches in relation to defining serious reportable patient safety incidents.
Methods: Multiple electronic and gray literature databases were searched for articles published between 2009 and 2019. Empirical studies, reviews, national reports, and policies were included. A narrative synthesis was conducted because of study heterogeneity.
Results: A total of 50 articles were included. There was wide variation in the terminology used to represent serious reportable patient safety incidents. Several countries defined a specific subset of incidents, which are considered sufficiently serious, yet preventable if appropriate safety measures are taken. Terms such as "never events," "serious reportable events," or "always review and report" were used. The following dimensions were identified to define a serious reportable patient safety incident: (1) incidents being largely preventable; (2) having the potential for significant learning; (3) causing serious harm or have the potential to cause serious harm; (4) being identifiable, measurable, and feasible for inclusion in an incident reporting system; and (5) running the risk of recurrence.
Conclusions: Variations in terminology and reporting systems between countries might contribute to missed opportunities for learning. International standardized definitions and blame-free reporting systems would enable comparison and international learning to enhance patient safety.
Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors disclose no conflict of interest.
Figures
References
-
- World Health Organisation . Patient safety. Global action on patient safety. Report by the Director-General. 2018. Available at: https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/EB144/B144_29-en.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2020.
-
- Makeham M Dovey S Runciman W, et al. . Methods and measures used in primary care patient safety research. 2008. Available at: http://www.who.int/patientsafety/research/methods_measures/makeham_dovey.... Accessed January 15, 2020.
-
- Panesar SS deSilva D Carson-Stevens A, et al. . How safe is primary care? A systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016;25:544–553. - PubMed
-
- European Commission . Key findings and recommendations on reporting and learning systems for patient safety incidents across Europe. 2014. Available at: http://buonepratiche.agenas.it/documents/More/8.pdf. Accessed January 15, 2020.
-
- Macrae C. The problem with incident reporting. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016;25:71–75. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
