Can we quantify harm in general practice records? An assessment of precision and power using computer simulation

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2013, Pages

  De Wet, Carl ^a,b   Johnson, Paul ^b   O'Donnell, Catherine ^b   Bowie, Paul ^a  

^a NHS EDUCATION FOR SCOTLAND   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Clinical record review; General practice; Harm; Patient safety; Power; Precision; Primary care; Trigger tool

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD; STANDARD;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; HEALTH RECORDS, PERSONAL; HUMANS; MALE;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84874798371     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-39     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. The Health Foundation, Evidence scan: Levels of harm. Published Jan 2011 London: Available at: http://www.health.org.uk/public/cms/75/76/313/2593/ Levels%20of%20harm.pdf?realName=PYiXMz.pdf. Acessed 30/10/2012
2. Healthcare Improvement Scotland, Patient Safety in Primary Care: 2012 Available at: http://www.healthcareimprovementscotland.org/programmes/patient- safety/patient-safety-in-primary-care.aspx. Accessed 28/09/20120
3. Improving safety in primary care. The Health Foundation, 2011 Available at: http://www.health.org.uk/publications/improving-safety-in-primary-care/. Accessed 01/03/2013
4. Mountains in the clouds: patient safety research. Bates DW, Qual Saf Health Care 2008 17 3 156 157 10.1136/qshc.2007.025874 18519619
5. Adverse events in British hospitals: preliminary retrospective record review. Vincent C, Neale G, Woloshynowych M, BMJ 2001 322 7285 517 519 10.1136/bmj.322.7285.517 11230064 (Pubitemid 32230913)
6. Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients: results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I. 1991. Brennan TA, Leape LL, Laird NM, Hebert L, Localio AR, Lawthers AG, Qual Saf Health Care 2004 13 2 145 151 discussion 151-2 10.1136/qshc.2002.003822 15069223
7. Methodology and rationale for the measurement of harm with trigger tools. Resar RK, Rozich JD, Classen D, Qual Saf Health Care 2003 12 Suppl 2 39 45
8. Performance characteristics of a methodology to quantify adverse events over time in hospitalized patients. Sharek PJ, Parry G, Goldmann D, Bones K, Hackbarth A, Resar R, Health Serv Res 2011 46 2 654 678 10.1111/j.1475-6773. 2010.01156.x 20722749
9. Strategies for detecting adverse drug events among older persons in the ambulatory setting. Field TS, Gurwitz JH, Harrold LR, Rothschild JM, Debellis K, Seger AC, J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004 11 6 492 498 Nov-Dec 10.1197/jamia.M1586 15299000 (Pubitemid 39421733)
10. Mix of methods is needed to identify adverse events in general practice: a prospective observational study. Wetzels R, Wolters R, van Weel C, Wensing M, BMC Fam Pract 2008 9 35 10.1186/1471-2296-9-35 18554418 (Pubitemid 351904884)
11. To what extent are adverse events found in patient records reported by patients and healthcare professionals via complaints, claims and incident reports? Christiaans-Dingelhoff I, Smits M, Zwaan L, Lubberding S, Van DW, Wagner C, BMC Health Serv Res 2011 11 1 49 10.1186/1472-6963-11-49 21356056
12. Development and Evaluation of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Global Trigger Tool. Classen DC, Lloyd RC, Provost L, Griffin FA, Resar R, J Pt Saf 2008 4 3 169 177
13. Detection of adverse events in surgical patients using the Trigger Tool approach. Griffin FA, Classen DC, Qual Saf Health Care 2008 17 4 253 258 10.1136/qshc.2007.025080 18678721
14. The development of the Canadian paediatric trigger tool for identifying potential adverse events. Matlow A, Flintoft V, Orrbine E, Brady-Fryer B, Cronin CM, Nijssen-Jordan C, Healthc Q 2005 8 Spec No 90 93 16334079
15. Adverse events in the neonatal intensive care unit: development, testing, and findings of an NICU-focused trigger tool to identify harm in North American NICUs. Sharek PJ, Horbar JD, Mason W, Bisarya H, Thurm CW, Suresh G, Pediatrics 2006 118 4 1332 1340 10.1542/peds.2006-0565 17015521 (Pubitemid 46393776)
16. Development, testing, and findings of a pediatric-focused trigger tool to identify medication-related harm in US children's hospitals. Takata GS, Mason W, Taketomo C, Logsdon T, Sharek PJ, Pediatrics 2008 121 4 927 e935 10.1542/peds.2007-1779 18381521
17. The preliminary development and testing of a global trigger tool to detect error and patient harm in primary-care records. de Wet C, Bowie P, Postgrad Med J 2009 85 1002 176 180 10.1136/pgmj.2008.075788 19417164
18. Experience with a trigger tool for identifying adverse drug events among older adults in ambulatory primary care. Singh R, McLean-Plunckett EA, Kee R, Wisniewski A, Cadzow R, Okazaki S, Qual Saf Health Care 2009 18 3 199 204 10.1136/qshc.2007.024406 19468002
19. Prevalence and consequences of patient safety incidents in general practice in the Netherlands: a retrospective medical record review study. Gaal S, Verstappen W, Wolters R, Lankveld H, van Weel C, Wensing M, Implement Sci 2011 6 1 37 10.1186/1748-5908-6-37 21470418
20. Searching primary care records for predefined triggers may expose latent risks and adverse events. Bowie P, Halley L, Gillies J, Houston N, de Wet C, Clin Risk 2012 18 January 13 18
21. Screening electronic patient records to detect preventable harm: a trigger tool for primary care. de Wet C, Bowie P, QPC 2011 19 2 115 125
22. Information Services Division Scotland, Practices and their Populations: 2012 Available at: http://www.isdscotland.org/Health-Topics/General-Practice/ Practices-and-Their-Populations/. Accessed 09/28, 2012
23. Significant event analysis guidance for primary care teams. Bowie P, de Wet C, Pringle M, 2011 Available at: http://gptraining.dundee.ac.uk/docs/2011/ NES%20SEA%20Guide%20FinalVersion%202011.pdf:1-48. Accessed 01/03/2013
24. Measuring perceptions of safety climate in primary care: a cross-sectional study. de Wet C, Johnson P, Mash R, McConnachie A, Bowie P, J Eval Clin Pract 2012 18 135 142 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01537.x 20860593
25. Interpreting parameters in the logistic regression model with random effects. Larsen K, Peterson JH, Budtz-Jorgensen E, Endahl L, Biometrics 2000 56 3 909 914 10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00909.x 10985236
26. Empirical Bayes estimates of age-standardaized relative risks for use in disease mapping. Clayton D, Kaldor J, Biometrics 1987 43 3 671 681 10.2307/2532003 3663823 (Pubitemid 18045149)
27. RR Development Core Team, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing 2011
28. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, lme4: linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375-39 2011 Available at: http://CRAN.R- project.org/package=lme4. Accessed 01/03/2013
29. Venables WN, Ripley BD, Modern Applied Statistics with S New York: Springer 4 2002
30. MCMC Methods for multi-response generalized linear mixed models: the MCMCglmm R package. Hadfield JD, J Stat Softw 2010 33 2 1 22 20808728
31. Measuring harm levels with the Global Trigger Tool. Carter M, Clin Risk 2010 16 4 122 126 10.1258/cr.2010.010031
32. Temporal trends in rates of patient harm resulting from medical care. Landrigan CP, Parry GJ, Bones CB, Hackbarth AD, Goldmann DA, Sharek PJ, N Engl J Med 2010 363 22 2124 2134 10.1056/NEJMsa1004404 21105794
33. Care homes' use of medicines study: prevalence, causes and potential harm of medication errors in care homes for older people. Barber ND, Alldred DP, Raynor DK, Dickinson R, Garfield S, Jesson B, QSHC 2009 18 341 346
34. Indicators for preventable drug related morbidity: application in primary care. Morris CJ, Rodgers S, Hammersley VS, Avery AJ, Cantrill JA, Qual Saf Health Care 2004 13 3 181 185 10.1136/qshc.2003.008334 15175487 (Pubitemid 38797503)
35. Measurement for improvement: getting one to follow the other. Scott I, Phelps G, Intern Med J 2009 39 6 347 351 19580616
36. Quality improvement projects for appraisal and revalidation of general practitioners. Siriwardena AN, Quality Prim Care 2011 19 205 209