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
. 2020 Dec;16(4):e340-e351.
doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000576.

Applying the Global Trigger Tool in German Hospitals: A Pilot in Surgery and Neurosurgery

Mareen Brösterhaus  1 , Antje Hammer  1 , Steffen Kalina, Stefan Grau  2 , Anjali A Roeth  3 , Hany Ashmawy  4 , Thomas Groß  5 , Marcel Binnebösel  3 , Wolfram Trudo Knoefel  4 , Tanja Manser  6
Affiliations

Applying the Global Trigger Tool in German Hospitals: A Pilot in Surgery and Neurosurgery

Mareen Brösterhaus et al. J Patient Saf. 2020 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the study was to assess the feasibility and potential of the Global Trigger Tool (GTT) for identifying adverse events (AEs) in different specialties in German hospitals.

Methods: A total of 120 patient records were randomly selected from two surgical and one neurosurgery departments of three university hospitals in Germany for a period of 2 months per department between January and July 2017. The records were reviewed using an adaptation of the German version of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement GTT.

Results: Thirty-nine records (32.5%) contained at least one AE. A total of 53 AEs were found in these 39 records. The incidences of AEs were 18.9% and 35.9% in the two surgical departments and 45.3% in neurosurgery. This corresponded to AE rates of 25.5 to 72.1 per 1000 patient-days and from 25.0 to 60.0 per 100 admissions across the three departments. A total of 71.7% of all identified AEs resulted in temporary harm (category E), 26.4% in temporary harm, requiring prolonged hospitalization (category F), and 1.9% in permanent patient harm. We also identified practical challenges, such as the necessary adaptation of the GTT relative to the respective department.

Conclusions: The application of the GTT is feasible and represents an effective instrument for quality measurement when adapted to the departmental specifics. The trigger detection with the GTT is a valuable addition for proactive analyses of high-risk processes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors disclose no conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Most frequently detected triggers per department.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Most frequently detected triggers in records with an AE.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Murff HJ Patel VL Hripcsak G, et al. . Detecting adverse events for patient safety research: a review of current methodologies. J Biomed Inform. 2003;36:131–143. - PubMed
    1. Hibbert PD Molloy CJ Hooper TD, et al. . The application of the Global Trigger Tool: a systematic review. Int J Qual Health Care. 2016;28:640–649. - PubMed
    1. Hart D, Becker-Schwarze K. Risiken verringern, Sicherheit steigern: Kinderkliniken für Patientensicherheit. Köln: Dt. Ärzte-Verl; 2009.
    1. Madea B, Dettmeyer R, eds. Medizinschadensfälle und Patientensicherheit: Häufigkeit - Begutachtung - Prophylaxe. Köln: Deutscher Ärzte-Verlag; 2007.
    1. Davies H, Powell A, Rushmer R. Why don't clinicians engage with quality improvement? J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007;12:129–130. - PubMed

Publication types