[Detection of adverse events in thyroid and parathyroid surgery using trigger tool and Minimum Basic Data Set (MBDS)]. / Detección de eventos adversos en la cirugía tiroidea y paratiroidea utilizando la herramienta trigger y el Conjunto Mínimo de Datos Básicos (CMBD).

OBJECTIVES: To compare the ability of the trigger tool) and the Minimum Basic Data Set (MBDS) in detecting adverse events (AE) in hospitalized surgical patients with thyroid and parathyroid disease. METHODS: A descriptive, cross-sectional observational study, retrospective and cross-sectional study was conducted from May 2014 to April 2015 analysing retrospectively data on of patients submitted to thyroidectomy and parathyroidectomy in order to detect AE through the identification of triggers (an event often associated to an AE) and the MBDS. triggers and AE were located by systematic review of clinical documentation. The MBDS was got from the data base. Once an AE was detected, it was characterized. RESULTS: 203 AE were identified in 251 patients, being the 90.04% detected by trigger tool and 10.34% by MBDS. 126 patients had at least one AE (50.2%). Without the cases in which uncontrolled pain was the only AE, the percentage of patients that suffering AE was 38.65%. 187 AE were considered preventable and 16 AE were considered unpreventable. The trigger tool and the MBDS demonstrated a sensitivity of 91.27 and 13.49%, a specificity of 4.8 and 100%, a positive predictive value of 49,15 and 100%, and a negative predictive value of 35.29 and 53.42%, respectively. The triggers with more predictive power in AE detection were «antiemetic administration¼ and «calcium administration¼. CONCLUSIONS: Trigger tool shows higher sensitivity for detecting AE than the MBDS. All the detected AE were considered low severity and most of them were preventable.

[Comparison of the "Trigger" tool with the minimum basic data set for detecting adverse events in general surgery]. / Comparación de la herramienta Trigger con el conjunto mínimo básico de datos (CMBD) para la detección de eventos adversos en cirugía general.

INTRODUCTION: Surgery is a high risk for the occurrence of adverse events (AE). The main objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of the Trigger tool with the Hospital National Health System registration of Discharges, the minimum basic data set (MBDS), in detecting adverse events in patients admitted to General Surgery and undergoing surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Observational and descriptive retrospective study of patients admitted to general surgery of a tertiary hospital, and undergoing surgery in 2012. The identification of adverse events was made by reviewing the medical records, using an adaptation of "Global Trigger Tool" methodology, as well as the (MBDS) registered on the same patients. Once the AE were identified, they were classified according to damage and to the extent to which these could have been avoided. The area under the curve (ROC) were used to determine the discriminatory power of the tools. The Hanley and Mcneil test was used to compare both tools. RESULTS: AE prevalence was 36.8%. The TT detected 89.9% of all AE, while the MBDS detected 28.48%. The TT provides more information on the nature and characteristics of the AE. The area under the curve was 0.89 for the TT and 0.66 for the MBDS. These differences were statistically significant (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Trigger tool detects three times more adverse events than the MBDS registry. The prevalence of adverse events in General Surgery is higher than that estimated in other studies.