Quality and safety revolution in health care

Radiology

Volumn 233, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 3-6

  Thrall, James H ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Medicolegal problems; Perspectives

Indexed keywords

ACCREDITATION; ADVERSE DRUG REACTION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DOSIMETRY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; INFORMATION SCIENCE; MEDICAL ERROR; MEDICOLEGAL ASPECT; NEGLIGENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGY; REVIEW; SAFETY; UNITED STATES;

HEALTH SERVICES; HUMANS; OUTCOME AND PROCESS ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; RADIOLOGY; SAFETY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 4644245736     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2331041059     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Brennan TA, Leape LL, Laird NM, et al. Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients: results of the Harvard Medical Practice study. I. N Engl J Med 1991; 324:370-376.
2. Leape LL, Brennan TA, Laird N, et al. The nature of adverse events in hospitalized patients: results of the Harvard Medical Practice study. II. N Engl J Med 1991; 324:377-384.
3. Leape LL, Bates DW, Cullen DJ, et al. Systems analysis of adverse drug events. ADE Prevention Study Group. JAMA 1995; 274:35-43.
4. Bates DW, Cullen DJ, Laird N, et al. Incidence of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events: implications for prevention. ADE Prevention Study Group. JAMA 1995; 274:29-34.
5. Chassin MR, Galvin RW. The urgent need to improve health care quality: Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality. JAMA 1998; 280:1000-1005.
6. Cullen DJ, Sweitzer BJ, Bates DW, Burdick E, Edmondson A, Leape LL. Preventable adverse drug events in hospitalized patients: a comparative study of intensive care and general care units. Crit Care Med 1997; 25:1289-1297.
7. Thomas EJ, Studdert DM, Burstin HR, et al. Incidence and types of adverse events and negligent care in Utah and Colorado. Med Care 2000; 38:261-271.
8. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, eds. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2000.
9. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001.
10. Select quality care. Choose (more) wisely. Available at: www.selectqualitycare.com/. Accessed June 13, 2004.
11. The Leapfrog Group. Purchasing principles. Available at: www.leapfroggroup.org/. Accessed May 27, 2004.
12. Executive summary. In: Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, eds. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001; 1-16.
13. McDonald CJ, Weiner M, Hui SL. Deaths due to medical errors are exaggerated in Institute of Medicine report. JAMA 2000; 284:93-95.
14. Thomas EJ, Lipsitz SR, Studdert DM, Brennan TA. The reliability of medical record review for estimating adverse event rates. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136:812-816.
15. Gawande AA, Zinner MJ, Studdert DM, Brennan TA. Analysis of errors reported by surgeons at three teaching hospitals. Surgery 2003; 133:614-621.
16. Leape LL, Cullen DJ, Clapp MD, et al. Pharmacist participation on physician rounds and adverse drug events in the intensive care unit. JAMA 1999; 282:267-270.
17. Cullen DJ, Bates DW, Leape LL; Adverse Drug Event Prevention Study Group. Prevention of adverse drug events: a decade of progress in patient safety. J Clin Anesth 2000; 12: 600-614.
18. Why do errors happen. In: Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, eds. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001; 49-68.
19. Using information technology. In: Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001; 164-180.
20. The Quality Colloquium. The leading forum on health care quality enhancement and medical error reduction. Available at: www .qualitycolloquium. com/. Accessed May 27, 2004.
21. Improving the 21st century health care system. In: Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001; 39-60.
22. President's Information Technology Advisory Committee. PITAC reports to the president. Available at: www.hpcc.gov/pitac. Accessed June 6, 2004.
23. Alliance for Health Reform. Commonwealth fund. Available at: www.cmwf.org/programs /quality/ehealthiniative_itqualitycare.pdf. Accessed June 14, 2004.
24. O'Leary DS. Underreported sentinel events. Available at: www.jcaho/accredited+organizations /ambulatory+care/sentinel+events/ dear+colleague +letter.htm. Accessed June 30, 2004.
25. Wald H, Shojania KG. Root cause analysis. Available at: www.ahrq/gov/clinic/ptsafety/chap5 .htm. Accessed June 30, 2004.
26. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. Sentinel event statistics. Available at: www.jcaho.org/accredited +organizations/ ambulatory+care/sentinel+events /sentinel+event+statistics.htm. Accessed June 30, 2004.
27. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations.. A journey through the history of the joint commission. Available at: www.jcaho.org/ about+us/history/index.htm. Accessed May 27, 2004.
28. Borgstede JP, Lewis RS, Bhargavan M, Sunshine JH. RADPEER quality assurance program: a multifacility study of interpretive disagreement rates. J Am Coll Radiol 2004; 1:59-65.
29. Hillman BJ, Amis ES, Neiman HL. The future quality and safety of medical imaging: proceedings of the third annual ACR forum. J Am Coll Radiol 2004; 1:33-39.
30. Kalra MK, Prasad S, Saini S, et al. Clinical comparison of standard-dose and 50% reduced-dose abdominal CT: effect on image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179: 1101-1106.
31. Mullins ME, Lev MH, Bove P, et al. Comparison of image quality between conventional and low-dose nonenhanced head CT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004; 25:533-538.
32. Hamberg LM, Rhea JT, Hunter GJ, Thrall JH. Multi-detector row CT: radiation dose characteristics. Radiology 2003; 226:762-772.