Risk assessment in adverse events
Keywords:
EVENTOS ADVERSOS, RISK EVALUATIONAbstract
The Veterans Administration has developed criteria that allow us to grade the severity of an adverse event and the likelihood of its recurrence.
Categories by probability:
1. Frequent: they occur repeatedly, they are repeated every short period.
2. Occasional: they occur several times every one or two years.
3. Infrequent: they can occur sometimes in two to five years.
4. Remote: they occur sometime in two to five years.
Categories by consequences:
1. Catastrophic: iatrogenic death or permanent loss of death due to the event analyzed.
2. Major: impaired function or physiognomy of a patient, need for surgical intervention or prolonged stay or greater level of care.
3. Moderate: increase in stay, higher expenses, greater need for monitoring.
4. Minor: no injury, no treatment required, loss of utility to the institution without harm to the patient.
References
(Ordenadas por fecha de publicación)
Wilson RM, Runciman WB, Gibberd RW, Harrison BT, Newby L, Hamilton JD.
The Quality in Australian Health Care Study. Med J Aust 1995; 163(9): 458-71.
Great Britain Chief Medical Officer. Great Britain Deparment of Health.
An organization with a memory: report of an expert group on learning from adverse events in the NHS. London: Deportment of Health, Stationery Office, 2000.
Wu, AW. Medical error: the second victim. The doctor who makes the mistake needs help too. BMJ 2000; 320(7237): 726-7.
Institute of Medicine. Kohn L, Corrigan J, Donaldson M, eds. To err is human: building a Safer Health System. Washington, D.C: Nacional Academy Press, 2000.
Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm. A new Health System for the 21st century. Washington, D.C: Nacional Academy Press, 2001.
Vincet C, Neale G, Woloshynowych M. Adverse events in British hospitals: Preliminary retrospective record review. BMJ 2001; 322(7285): 517-9.
Baker GR, Norton PG, Flintoft V, Blais R, Brown A, Cox J, et al. The Canadian Adverse Events Study: the incidence of adverse events among hospital patients in Canada. CMAJ 2004; 170(11): 1678-86.
Aranz JM, Aibar C, Vitaller J, Ruiz P. Estudio nacional sobre los efectos adversos ligados a la hospitalización ENEAS 2005. Madrid: Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo; 2006.
Vincent, Charles. Patient Safety. Edinburgh: Elsevier, 2006.
Runciman WB, Merry A, Walton M. Safety and ethics in healthcare. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007.
Volpp KG, Landrigan CP. Building physician work hour regulations from first principles and best evidence. JAMA 2008; 300(10): 1197-9.
Watcher, Robert. Understanding Patient Safety. New York: Mc Graw Hill, 2008.
España. Ministerio de Sanidad y Política Social. Estudio IBEAS: Prevalencia de Efectos Adversos en Hospitales de Latinoamérica. Madrid: Ministerio de Sanidad y Política Social, 2009.
López L, Weissman JS, Schneider EC, Weingart SN, Cohen AP, Epstein AM. Disclosure of hospital adverse events and its association with patients ratings of the quality of care. Arch Intern Med 2009; 169(20): 1888-94.
Wachter RM. Entering the second decade of the patient safety movement: the field matures: comment on «disclosure of hospital adverse events and its association with patients ratings of the quality of care». Arch Intern Med 2009; 169(20): 1894-6.
Longtin Y, Sax H, Leape LL, Sheridan SE, Donaldson L, Pittet D. Patient participation: current knowledge and applicability to patient safety. Mayo Clin Proc 2010; 85(1): 53-62.
O'Leary KJ, Kulkarni N, Landler MP, Jeon J, Hahn KJ, Englert KM, et al. Hospitalized patients understanding of their plan of care. Mayo Clin Proc 2010; 85(1): 47-52.
