Real-time quantification and display of skin radiation during coronary angiography and intervention

BACKGROUND: Radiographically guided investigations may be associated with excessive radiation exposure, which may cause skin injuries. The purpose of this study was to develop and test a system that measures in real time the dose applied to each 1-cm(2) area of skin, taking into account the movement of the x-ray source and changes in the beam characteristics. The goal of such a system is to help prevent high doses that might cause skin injury. METHODS AND RESULTS: The entrance point, beam size, and dose at the skin of the patient were calculated by use of the geometrical settings of gantry, investigation table, and x-ray beam and an ionization chamber. The data are displayed graphically. Three hundred twenty-two sequential cardiac investigations in adult patients were analyzed. The mean peak entrance dose per investigation was 0.475 Gy to a mean skin area of 8.2 cm(2). The cumulative KERMA-area product per investigation was 52.2 Gy/cm(2) (25.4 to 99.2 Gy/cm(2)), and the mean entrance beam size at the skin was 49.2 cm(2). Twenty-eight percent of the patients (90/322) received a maximum dose of 2 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring of the dose distribution at the skin will alert the operator to the development of high-dose areas; by use of other gantry settings with nonoverlapping entrance fields, different generator settings, and extra collimation, skin lesion can be avoided

A Comprehensive Overview of Medical Error in Hospitals Using Incident-Reporting Systems, Patient Complaints and Chart Review of Inpatient Deaths

<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Incident reporting systems (IRS) are used to identify medical errors in order to learn from mistakes and improve patient safety in hospitals. However, IRS contain only a small fraction of occurring incidents. A more comprehensive overview of medical error in hospitals may be obtained by combining information from multiple sources. The WHO has developed the International Classification for Patient Safety (ICPS) in order to enable comparison of incident reports from different sources and institutions.</p> <h3>Methods</h3><p>The aim of this paper was to provide a more comprehensive overview of medical error in hospitals using a combination of different information sources. Incident reports collected from IRS, patient complaints and retrospective chart review in an academic acute care hospital were classified using the ICPS. The main outcome measures were distribution of incidents over the thirteen categories of the ICPS classifier “Incident type”, described as odds ratios (OR) and proportional similarity indices (PSI).</p> <h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 1012 incidents resulted in 1282 classified items. Large differences between data from IRS and patient complaints (PSI = 0.32) and from IRS and retrospective chart review (PSI = 0.31) were mainly attributable to behaviour (OR = 6.08), clinical administration (OR = 5.14), clinical process (OR = 6.73) and resources (OR = 2.06).</p> <h3>Conclusions</h3><p>IRS do not capture all incidents in hospitals and should be combined with complementary information about diagnostic error and delayed treatment from patient complaints and retrospective chart review. Since incidents that are not recorded in IRS do not lead to remedial and preventive action in response to IRS reports, healthcare centres that have access to different incident detection methods should harness information from all sources to improve patient safety.</p> </div