Adverse events in orthopedic care identified via the Global Trigger Tool in Sweden – implications on preventable prolonged hospitalizations

Background: The national incidence of adverse events (AEs) in Swedish orthopedic care has never been described. A new national database has made it possible to describe incidence, nature, preventability and consequences of AEs in Swedish orthopedic care. Methods: We used national data from a structured two-stage record review with a Swedish modification of the Global Trigger Tool. The sample was 4,994 randomly selected orthopedic admissions in 56 hospitals during 2013 and 2014. The AEs were classified according to the Swedish Patient Safety Act into preventable or non-preventable. Results: At least one AE occurred in 733 (15%, 95% CI 13.7-15.7) admissions. Of 950 identified AEs, 697 (73%) were judged preventable. More than half of the AEs (54%) were of temporary nature. The most common types of AE were healthcare-associated infections and distended urinary bladder. Patients ≥65years had more AEs (p<0.001), and were more often affected by pressure ulcer (p<0.001) and urinary tract infections (p<0.01). Distended urinary bladder was seen more frequently in patients aged 18-64 years (p=0.01). Length of stay was twice as long for patients with AEs (p<0.001). We estimate 232,000 extra hospital days due to AEs during these 2years. The pattern of AEs in orthopedic care was different compared to other hospital specialties. Conclusions: Using a national database, we found AEs in 15% of orthopedic admissions. The majority of the AEs was of temporary nature and judged preventable. Our results can be used to guide focused patient safety work

Characterisations of adverse events detected in a university hospital: a 4-year study using the Global Trigger Tool method

Objectives: To describe the level, preventability and categories of adverse events (AEs) identified by medical record review using the Global Trigger Tool (GTT). To estimate when the AE occurred in the course of the hospital stay and to compare voluntary AE reporting with medical record reviewing. Design: Two-stage retrospective record review. Setting: 650-bed university hospital. Participants: 20 randomly selected medical records were reviewed every month from 2009 to 2012. Primary and secondary outcome measures: AE/1000 patient-days. Proportion of AEs found by GTT found also in the voluntary reporting system. AE categorisation. Description of when during hospital stay AEs occur. Results: A total of 271 AEs were detected in the 960 medical records reviewed, corresponding to 33.2 AEs/1000 patient-days or 20.5% of the patients. Of the AEs, 6.3% were reported in the voluntary AE reporting system. Hospital-acquired infections were the most common AE category. The AEs occurred and were detected during the hospital stay in 65.5% of cases; the rest occurred or were detected within 30 days before or after the hospital stay. The AE usually occurred early during the hospital stay, and the hospital stay was 5 days longer on average for patients with an AE. Conclusions: Record reviewing identified AEs to a much larger extent than voluntary AE reporting. Healthcare organisations should consider using a portfolio of tools to gain a comprehensive picture of AEs. Substantial costs could be saved if AEs were prevented

Characterisations of adverse events detected in a university hospital: a 4-year study using the Global Trigger Tool method

Objectives: To describe the level, preventability and categories of adverse events (AEs) identified by medical record review using the Global Trigger Tool (GTT). To estimate when the AE occurred in the course of the hospital stay and to compare voluntary AE reporting with medical record reviewing. Design: Two-stage retrospective record review. Setting: 650-bed university hospital. Participants: 20 randomly selected medical records were reviewed every month from 2009 to 2012. Primary and secondary outcome measures: AE/1000 patient-days. Proportion of AEs found by GTT found also in the voluntary reporting system. AE categorisation. Description of when during hospital stay AEs occur. Results: A total of 271 AEs were detected in the 960 medical records reviewed, corresponding to 33.2 AEs/1000 patient-days or 20.5% of the patients. Of the AEs, 6.3% were reported in the voluntary AE reporting system. Hospital-acquired infections were the most common AE category. The AEs occurred and were detected during the hospital stay in 65.5% of cases; the rest occurred or were detected within 30 days before or after the hospital stay. The AE usually occurred early during the hospital stay, and the hospital stay was 5 days longer on average for patients with an AE. Conclusions: Record reviewing identified AEs to a much larger extent than voluntary AE reporting. Healthcare organisations should consider using a portfolio of tools to gain a comprehensive picture of AEs. Substantial costs could be saved if AEs were prevented

Pressure ulcer prevalence and prevention interventions - A ten-year nationwide survey in Sweden

The aim of this study was to describe pressure ulcer prevalence and prevention interventions in hospital care in Sweden based on nationwide surveys conducted over a 10-year period. All Swedish hospitals were invited to participate in annual pressure ulcer prevalence surveys during the period 2011-2020. The data collection protocols included gender, age, skin assessment, risk assessment, and preventive interventions. In total, more than 130,000 patients were included in the ten prevalence surveys. The prevalence of pressure ulcers in Swedish hospital patients decreased significantly from 17.0 %to 11.4% between 2011 and 2020 and hospital-acquired pressure ulcers decreased from 8.1% to 6.4% between 2018 and 2020. There was no significant decline in medicaldevice-related pressure ulcers during the same period. The proportion of patients who were risk and skin assessed increased, as did the use of pressure-reducing mattresses, sliding sheets, heel protection, and nrepositioning plans. This study shows that the implementation of a national patient safety program has had an impact on the nationwide prevalence of pressure ulcers in hospital care and the occurrence of prevention strategies. However, one in ten patients in Swedish hospitals still suffers from pressure ulcers. Further improvements can be made

Preventable Adverse Events in Surgical Care in Sweden: A Nationwide Review of Patient Notes

Adverse events (AEs) occur in health care and may result in harm to patients especially in the field of surgery. Our objective was to analyze AEs in surgical patient care from a nationwide perspective and to analyze the frequency of AEs that may be preventable. In total 19,141 randomly selected admissions in 63 Swedish hospitals were reviewed each month during 2013 using a 2-stage record review method based on the identification of predefined triggers. The subgroup of 3301 surgical admissions was analyzed. All AEs were categorized according to site, type, level of severity, and degree of preventability. We reviewed 3301 patients records and 507 (15.4%) were associated with AEs. A total of 62.5% of the AEs were considered probably preventable, over half contributed to prolonged hospital care or readmission, and 4.7% to permanent harm or death. Healthcare acquired infections composed of more than one third of AEs. The majority of the most serious AEs composed of healthcare acquired infections and surgical or other invasive AEs. The incidence of AEs was 13% in patients 18 to 64 years old and 17% in &amp;gt;= 65 years. Pressure sores and drug-related AEs were more common in patients being &amp;gt;= 65 years. Urinary retention and pressure sores showed the highest degree of preventability. Patients with probably preventable AEs had in median 7.1 days longer hospital stay. We conclude that AEs are common in surgical care and the majority are probably preventable.Funding Agencies|Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions</p

Pressure ulcer prevalence and prevention interventions : A ten-year nationwide survey in Sweden

The aim of this study was to describe pressure ulcer prevalence and prevention interventions in hospital care in Sweden based on nationwide surveys conducted over a 10-year period. All Swedish hospitals were invited to participate in annual pressure ulcer prevalence surveys during the period 2011-2020. The data collection protocols included gender, age, skin assessment, risk assessment, and preventive interventions. In total, more than 130,000 patients were included in the ten prevalence surveys. The prevalence of pressure ulcers in Swedish hospital patients decreased significantly from 17.0 %to 11.4% between 2011 and 2020 and hospital-acquired pressure ulcers decreased from 8.1% to 6.4% between 2018 and 2020. There was no significant decline in medicaldevice-related pressure ulcers during the same period. The proportion of patients who were risk and skin assessed increased, as did the use of pressure-reducing mattresses, sliding sheets, heel protection, and nrepositioning plans. This study shows that the implementation of a national patient safety program has had an impact on the nationwide prevalence of pressure ulcers in hospital care and the occurrence of prevention strategies. However, one in ten patients in Swedish hospitals still suffers from pressure ulcers. Further improvements can be made

Incidence of adverse events in Sweden during 2013-2016: a cohort study describing the implementation of a national trigger tool

Objectives To describe the implementation of a trigger tool in Sweden and present the national incidence of adverse events (AEs) over a 4-year period during which an ongoing national patient safety initiative was terminated. Design Cohort study using retrospective record review based on a trigger tool methodology. Setting and participants Patients amp;gt;= 18 years admitted to all somatic acute care hospitals in Sweden from 2013 to 2016 were randomised into the study. Primary and secondary outcome measures Primary outcome rneasure was the incidence of AEs, and secondary measures were type of injury, severity of harm, preventability of AEs, estimated healthcare cost of AEs and incidence of AEs in patients cared for in another type of unit than the one specialised for their medical needs (off-site). Results In a review of 64 917 admissions, the average AE rates in 2014 (11.6%), 2015(10.9%) and 2016 (11.4%) were significantly lower than in 2013 (13.1 %). The decrease in the AE rates was seen in different age groups, in both genders and for preventable and non-preventable AEs. The decrease comprised only the least severe AEs. The types of AEs that decreased were hospital-acquired infections, urinary bladder distention and compromised vital signs. Patients cared for off-site had 84% more preventable AEs than patients cared for in the appropriate units. The cost of increased length of stay associated with preventable AEs corresponded to 13%-14% of the total cost of somatic hospital care in Sweden. Conclusions The rate of AEs in Swedish somatic hospitals has decreased from 2013 to 2016. Retrospective record review can be used to monitor patient safety over time, to assess the effects of national patient safety interventions and analyse challenges to patient safety such as the increasing care of patients off-site. It was found that the economic burden of preventable AEs is high.Funding Agencies|Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions</p

Adverse events in psychiatry : a national cohort study in Sweden with a unique psychiatric trigger tool

Background The vast majority of patient safety research has focused on somatic health care. Although specific adverse events (AEs) within psychiatric healthcare have been explored, the overall level and nature of AEs is sparsely investigated. Methods Cohort study using a retrospective record review based on a two-step trigger tool methodology in the charts of randomly selected patients 18 years or older admitted to the psychiatric acute care departments in all Swedish regions from January 1 to June 30, 2017. Hospital care together with corresponding outpatient care were reviewed as a continuum, over a maximum of 3 months. The AEs were categorised according to type, severity and preventability. Results In total, the medical records of 2552 patients were reviewed. Among the patients, 50.4% were women and 49.6% were men. The median (range) age was 44 (18–97) years for women and 44.5 (18–93) years for men. In 438 of the reviewed records, 720 AEs were identified, corresponding to the AEs identified in 17.2% [95% confidence interval, 15.7–18.6] of the records. The majority of AEs resulted in less or moderate harm, and 46.2% were considered preventable. Prolonged disease progression and deliberate self-harm were the most common types of AEs. AEs were significantly more common in women (21.5%) than in men (12.7%) but showed no difference between age groups. Severe or catastrophic harm was found in 2.3% of the records, and the majority affected were women (61%). Triggers pointing at deficient quality of care were found in 78% of the records, with the absence of a treatment plan being the most common. Conclusions AEs are common in psychiatric care. Aside from further patient safety work, systematic interventions are also warranted to improve the quality of psychiatric care.Funding Agencies|Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions; Linkoping University</p

Exploring similarities and differences in hospital adverse event rates between Norway and Sweden using Global Trigger Tool

OBJECTIVES: In this paper, we explore similarities and differences in hospital adverse event (AE) rates between Norway and Sweden by reviewing medical records with the Global Trigger Tool (GTT). DESIGN: All acute care hospitals in both countries performed medical record reviews, except one in Norway. Records were randomly selected from all eligible admissions in 2013. Eligible admissions were patients 18 years of age or older, undergoing care with an in-hospital stay of at least 24 hours, excluding psychiatric and care and rehabilitation. Reviews were done according to GTT methodology. SETTING: Similar contexts for healthcare and similar socioeconomic and demographic characteristics have inspired the Nordic countries to exchange experiences from measuring and monitoring quality and patient safety in healthcare. The co-operation has promoted the use of GTT to monitor national and local rates of AEs in hospital care. PARTICIPANTS: 10 986 medical records were reviewed in Norway and 19 141 medical records in Sweden. RESULTS: No significant difference between overall AE rates was found between the two countries. The rate was 13.0% (95% CI 11.7% to 14.3%) in Norway and 14.4% (95% CI 12.6% to 16.3%) in Sweden. There were significantly higher AE rates of surgical complications in Norwegian hospitals compared with Swedish hospitals. Swedish hospitals had significantly higher rates of pressure ulcers, falls and 'other' AEs. Among more severe AEs, Norwegian hospitals had significantly higher rates of surgical complications than Swedish hospitals. Swedish hospitals had significantly higher rates of postpartum AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The level of patient safety in acute care hospitals, as assessed by GTT, was essentially the same in both countries. The differences between the countries in the rates of several types of AEs provide new incentives for Norwegian and Swedish governing bodies to address patient safety issues