Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Health Aff (Millwood). 2011 Apr;30(4):581-9. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0190.

'Global trigger tool' shows that adverse events in hospitals may be ten times greater than previously measured.

Author information

  • 1University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. dclassen@csc.com

Erratum in

  • Health Aff (Millwood). 2011 Jun;30(6):1217.

Abstract

Identification and measurement of adverse medical events is central to patient safety, forming a foundation for accountability, prioritizing problems to work on, generating ideas for safer care, and testing which interventions work. We compared three methods to detect adverse events in hospitalized patients, using the same patient sample set from three leading hospitals. We found that the adverse event detection methods commonly used to track patient safety in the United States today-voluntary reporting and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Patient Safety Indicators-fared very poorly compared to other methods and missed 90 percent of the adverse events. The Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Global Trigger Tool found at least ten times more confirmed, serious events than these other methods. Overall, adverse events occurred in one-third of hospital admissions. Reliance on voluntary reporting and the Patient Safety Indicators could produce misleading conclusions about the current safety of care in the US health care system and misdirect efforts to improve patient safety.

Comment in

PMID:
21471476
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for HighWire
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk