Author： Giles S.J. Cook Gary A Jones Michael A Todd Brian Mason Margaret Muddu B.N. Walshe Kieran
Publisher： Emerald Group Publishing Ltd
ISSN： 1477-7274
Source： Clinical Governance: An International Journal, Vol.10, Iss.3, 2005-03, pp. : 217-230
Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.
Abstract
Purpose - The first phase of this study developed a multi-professionally agreed list of adverse events for clinical incident reporting in Trauma and Orthopaedics. This follow-up study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the adverse event list. Design/methodology/approach - Two follow-up questionnaires were sent to healthcare professionals working in Trauma and Orthopaedics in two of the participating National Health Service (NHS) Trusts (n=247 for the first questionnaire and n=240 for the second questionnaire). Trends in routine incident reporting data were also monitored over a two-year period to determine the impact of the adverse event list on levels of adverse event reporting. Findings - The questionnaires indicated that awareness about the adverse event list was good and improved between questionnaires. However usage of the adverse event list appeared to be poor. Multiple regression analysis with the dependent variable count of orthopaedic incidents suggested that the adverse event list had little, if any impact on levels of reporting in Trauma and Orthopaedics. Originality/value - The results of this study suggest that a practical tool, such as the adverse event list has little impact on incident reporting levels.
Related content
By Giles Sally Cook Gary Jones Michael Todd Brian Mason Margaret Walshe Kieran
Clinical Governance: An International Journal, Vol. 9, Iss. 4, 2004-12 ,pp. :
Access to resources
Recommend
