RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Evaluation of an intervention aimed at improving voluntary incident reporting in hospitals
JF Quality and Safety in Health Care
JO Qual Saf Health Care
FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd
SP 169
OP 175
DO 10.1136/qshc.2006.019349
VO 16
IS 3
A1 Sue M Evans
A1 Brian J Smith
A1 Adrian Esterman
A1 William B Runciman
A1 Guy Maddern
A1 Karen Stead
A1 Pam Selim
A1 Jane O’Shaughnessy
A1 Sandy Muecke
A1 Sue Jones
YR 2007
UL http://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/16/3/169.abstract
AB Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of an intervention package comprising intense education, a range of reporting options, changes in report management and enhanced feedback, in order to improve incident-reporting rates and change the types of incidents reported. Design, setting and participants: Non-equivalent group controlled clinical trial involving medical and nursing staff working in 10 intervention and 10 control units in four major cities and two regional hospitals in South Australia. Main outcome measures: Comparison of reporting rates by type of unit, profession, location of hospital, type of incident reported and reporting mechanism between baseline and study periods in control and intervention units. Results: The intervention resulted in significant improvement in reporting in inpatient areas (additional 60.3 reports/10 000 occupied bed days (OBDs); 95% CI 23.8 to 96.8, p<0.001) and in emergency departments (EDs) (additional 39.5 reports/10 000 ED attendances; 95% CI 17.0 to 62.0, p<0.001). More reports were generated (a) by doctors in EDs (additional 9.5 reports/10 000 ED attendances; 95% CI 2.2 to 16.8, p = 0.001); (b) by nurses in inpatient areas (additional 59.0 reports/10 000 OBDs; 95% CI 23.9 to 94.1, p<0.001) and (c) anonymously (additional 20.2 reports/10 000 OBDs and ED attendances combined; 95% CI 12.6 to 27.8, p<0.001). Compared with control units, the study resulted in more documentation, clinical management and aggression-related incidents in intervention units. In intervention units, more reports were submitted on one-page forms than via the call centre (1005 vs 264 reports, respectively). Conclusions: A greater variety and number of incidents were reported by the intervention units during the study, with improved reporting by doctors from a low baseline. However, there was considerable heterogeneity between reporting rates in different types of units.