rss
Qual Saf Health Care 2008;17:416-423 doi:10.1136/qshc.2007.024638
  • Error management

Adverse-event-reporting practices by US hospitals: results of a national survey

  1. D O Farley1,
  2. A Haviland1,
  3. S Champagne2,
  4. A K Jain3,
  5. J B Battles4,
  6. W B Munier4,
  7. J M Loeb2
  1. 1
    RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
  2. 2
    The Joint Commission, Oakbrook Terrace, Illinois, USA
  3. 3
    RAND Corporation, Arlington, Virginia, USA
  4. 4
    Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, Maryland, USA
  1. Dr D O Farley, RAND Corporation, 4570 Fifth Avenue, Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA; donna_farley{at}rand.org
  • Accepted 17 August 2008

Abstract

Context: Little is known about hospitals’ adverse-event-reporting systems, or how they use reported data to improve practices. This information is needed to assess effects of national patient-safety initiatives, including implementation of the Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005 (PSQIA). This survey generated baseline information on the characteristics of hospital adverse-event-reporting systems and processes, for use in assessing progress in improvements to reporting.

Methods: The Adverse Event Reporting Survey, developed by Westat, was administered in September 2005 through January 2006, using a mixed-mode (mail/telephone) survey with a stratified random sample of 2050 non-federal US hospitals. Risk managers were the respondents. An 81% response rate was obtained, for a sample of 1652 completed surveys.

Results: Virtually all hospitals reported they have centralised adverse-event-reporting systems, although characteristics varied. Scores on four performance indexes suggest that only 32% of hospitals have established environments that support reporting, only 13% have broad staff involvement in reporting adverse events, and 20–21% fully distribute and consider summary reports on identified events. Because survey responses are self-reported by risk managers, these may be optimistic assessments of hospital performance.

Conclusions: Survey findings document the current status of hospital adverse-event-reporting systems and point to needed improvements in reporting processes. PSQIA liability protections for hospitals reporting data to patient-safety organisations should also help stimulate improvements in hospitals’ internal reporting processes. Other mechanisms that encourage hospitals to strengthen their reporting systems, for example, strong patient-safety programmes, also would be useful.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None.

  • Ethics approval: Ethics approval was provided by the Human Subjects Protection Committee of the RAND Corporation.

  • See Commentary, p 400

Register for free content


Free sample
This recent issue is free to all users to allow everyone the opportunity to see the full scope and typical content of BMJ Quality & Safety.
View free sample issue >>

Free archive
The full back archive is now available for BMJ Quality & Safety. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006, back to volume 1 issue 1.
Register to access the free archive >>

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.