Development of a scoring system to quantify errors from semantic characteristics in incident reports.

OBJECTIVES: Incident reporting systems are widely used to identify risks and enable organisational learning. Free-text descriptions contain important information about factors associated with incidents. This study aimed to develop error scores by extracting information about the presence of error factors in incidents using an original decision-making model that partly relies on natural language processing techniques. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed free-text data from reports of incidents between January 2012 and December 2022 from Nagoya University Hospital, Japan. The sample data were randomly allocated to equal-sized training and validation datasets. We conducted morphological analysis on free text to segment terms from sentences in the training dataset. We calculated error scores for terms, individual reports and reports from staff groups according to report volume size and compared these with conventional classifications by patient safety experts. We also calculated accuracy, recall, precision and F-score values from the proposed 'report error score'. RESULTS: Overall, 114 013 reports were included. We calculated 36 131 'term error scores' from the 57 006 reports in the training dataset. There was a significant difference in error scores between reports of incidents categorised by experts as arising from errors (p<0.001, d=0.73 (large)) and other incidents. The accuracy, recall, precision and F-score values were 0.8, 0.82, 0.85 and 0.84, respectively. Group error scores were positively associated with expert ratings (correlation coefficient, 0.66; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.75, p<0.001) for all departments. CONCLUSION: Our error scoring system could provide insights to improve patient safety using aggregated incident report data.

Safety culture survey among medical residents in Japan: a nationwide cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine safety culture among Japanese medical residents through a comparative analysis of university and community hospitals and an investigation of the factors related to safety culture. METHOD: This nationwide cross-sectional study used a survey to assess first and second-year medical residents' perception of safety culture. We adapted nine key items from the Safety Awareness Questionnaire to the Japanese training environment and healthcare system. Additionally, we explored specific factors relevant to safety culture, such as gender, year of graduation, age, number of emergency room duties per month, average number of admissions per day, incident experience, incident reporting experience, barriers to incident reporting and safety culture. We analysed the data using descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: We included 5289 residents (88.6%) from community training hospitals and 679 residents (11.4%) from university hospitals. A comparative analysis of safety culture between the two groups on nine representative questions revealed that the percentage of residents who reported a positive atmosphere at their institution was significantly lower at university hospitals (81.7%) than at community hospitals (87.8%) (p<0.001). The other items were also significantly lower for university hospital residents. After adjusting for multivariate logistic analysis, university hospital training remained significantly and negatively associated with all nine safety culture items. Furthermore, we also found that university hospital residents perceived a significantly lower level of safety culture than community hospital residents. IMPLICATIONS: Further research and discussion on medical professionals' perception of safety culture in their institutions as well as other healthcare professionals' experiences are necessary to identify possible explanations for our findings and develop strategies for improvement.

In-Hospital Fall Risk Prediction by Objective Measurement of Lower Extremity Function in a High-Risk Population.

OBJECTIVES: Limited data exist regarding association between physical performance and in-hospital falls. This study was performed to investigate the association between physical performance and in-hospital falls in a high-risk population. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The study population consisted of 1200 consecutive patients with a median age of 74 years (50.8% men) admitted to a ward with high incidence rates of falls, primarily in the departments of geriatrics and neurology, in a university hospital between January 2019 and December 2021. METHODS: Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) was measured after treatment in the acute phase. As the primary end point of the study, the incidence of in-hospital falls was examined prospectively based on data from mandatory standardized incident report forms and electronic patient records. RESULTS: SPPB assessment was performed at a median of 3 days after admission, and the study population had a median SPPB score of 3 points. Falls occurred in 101 patients (8.4%) over a median hospital stay of 15 days. SPPB score showed a significant inverse association with the incidence of in-hospital falls after adjusting for possible confounders (adjusted odds ratio for each 1-point decrease in SPPB: 1.19, 95% CI 1.10-1.28; P < .001), and an SPPB score ≤6 was significantly associated with increased risk of in-hospital falls. Inclusion of SPPB with previously identified risk factors significantly increased the area under the curve for in-hospital falls (0.683 vs. 0.740, P = .003). CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: This study demonstrated an inverse association of SPPB score with risk of in-hospital falls in a high-risk population and showed that SPPB assessment is useful for accurate risk stratification in a hospital setting.

[Anticancer Drug Treatment and Patient Safety].

Chemotherapy using anticancer drugs has made rapid progress. On the other hand, it forms one of the most high-risk areas of practice in modern medicine. In fact, medical accidents caused by anticancer drugs have occurred in many countries and have had a great impact on patient safety. In this article, we look back on past anticancer drug accidents that occurred in the United States and Japan. In addition, we will share recent cases reported in the country. Furthermore, we will introduce the overall picture(double loop)of patient safety practice created by the Health, Labor and Welfare Science Research. Medical institutions need to respond to emergencies promptly, systematically, ethically, and fairly, as well as to practice actuarial and effective normal operations. If more advanced and pioneering treatments are to be carried out, a foundational safety practice system is necessary to support them. Considering the double loops described in this article, please review the patient safety system within your facility.

Nationwide survey on Japanese residents' experience with and barriers to incident reporting.

The ability of any incident reporting system to improve patient care is dependent upon robust reporting practices. However, under-reporting is still a problem worldwide. We aimed to reveal the barriers experienced while reporting an incident through a nationwide survey in Japan. We conducted a cross-sectional survey. All first- and second-year residents who took the General Medicine In-Training Examination (GM-ITE) from February to March 2021 in Japan were selected for the study. The voluntary questionnaire asked participants regarding the number of safety incidents encountered and reported within the previous year and the barriers to reporting incidents. Demographics were obtained from the GM-ITE. The answers of respondents who indicated they had never previously reported an incident (non-reporting group) were compared to those of respondents who had reported at least one incident in the previous year (reporting group). Of 5810 respondents, the vast majority indicated they had encountered at least one safety incident in the past year (n = 4449, 76.5%). However, only 2724 (46.9%) had submitted an incident report. Under-reporting (more safety incidents compared to the number of reports) was evident in 1523 (26.2%) respondents. The most frequently mentioned barrier to reporting an incident was the time required to file the report (n = 2622, 45.1%). The barriers to incident reporting were significantly different between resident physicians who had previously reported and those who had never previously reported an incident. Our study revealed that resident physicians in Japan commonly encounter patient safety incidents but under-report them. Numerous perceived and experienced barriers to reporting remain, which should be addressed if incident reporting systems are to have an optimal impact on improving patient safety. Incident reporting is essential for improving patient safety in an institution, and this study recommends establishing appropriate interventions according to each learner's barriers for reporting.

Development of a Novel Scoring System to Quantify the Severity of Incident Reports: An Exploratory Research Study.

Incident reporting systems have been widely adopted to collect information about patient safety incidents. Much of the value of incident reports lies in the free-text section. Computer processing of semantic information may be helpful to analyze this. We developed a novel scoring system for decision making to assess the severity of incidents using the semantic characteristics of the text in incident reports, and compared its results with experts' opinions. We retrospectively analyzed free-text data from incident reports from January 2012 to September 2021 at Nagoya University Hospital, Aichi, Japan. The sample was allocated to training and validation datasets using the hold-out method. Morphological analysis was used to segment terms in the training dataset. We calculated a severity term score, a severity report score and severity group score, by report volume size, and compared these with conventional severity classifications by patient safety experts and reporters. We allocated 96,082 incident reports into two groups. We calculated 1,802 severity term scores from the 48,041 reports in the training dataset. There was a significant difference in severity report score between reports categorized as severe and not severe by experts (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.83 to -0.80, p < 0.001, d = 0.81). Severity group scores were positively associated with severity ratings from experts and reporters (correlation coefficients 0.73 [95% CI 0.63-0.80, p < 0.001] and 0.79 [95% CI 0.71-0.85, p < 0.001]) for all departments. Our severity scoring system could therefore contribute to better organizational patient safety.

The comprehensive double loop activities for patient safety management.

We practice patient safety as a model that links patient safety and quality improvement in healthcare. The most important activity is the incident report. The loop on the left is during usual situation activity related to quality improvement in healthcare. The loop on the right is during critical situations activity related to patient safety. What is important in these activities is the initial response to the critical situation, which is the first corner of the right loop. We practice emphasizing the initial response to the critical situation, creating the pattern, and taking measures without omissions. Although many patient safety measures have been taken, it has become clear that there is a shortage of doctors who can practice them. We have practiced that pattern and supported advanced healthcare. We want you to explain the pattern and use it in practice.

Relationship between use of sleep medication and accidental falls during hospitalization.

Falls are common in elderly patients, and prevention of fall is important for safety and for reduction of health care costs. Sleep medications are among many potential causes of fall. In this study, we examined relationship of sleep medication with fall from January 2017 to December 2017. 726 falls occurred in 442 patients, and the average age at the time of fall was 60.7 ± 23.8 years. Fall was most common in patients with neurological disease, followed by gastroenterological, ophthalmological, respiratory, and orthopedic conditions. Sleep medication was used in 223 falls (31%). Fall occurred at all times of day, but with a different distribution in patients with and without use of sleep medication. Thus, the rate of falls from 22:00 to 6:00 was significantly higher in patients using sleep medication (62% vs. 18%, p<0.01). There was also a significantly higher rate of multiple falls in patient using sleep medication (p<0.01). Zolpidem (25%, n=63), a non-benzodiazepine, was the most frequently used sleep medication, followed by brotizolam (16%, n=41) and etizolam (13%, n=32), which are both benzodiazepines. Multiple falls from 22:00 to 6:00 occurred significantly more frequently in patients using ≥2 types of sleep medications compared to one (53% vs. 17%, p<0.01). Taking multiple sleeping pills makes it easier to fall, and even drugs with a short half-life, which are considered to be safe, can cause falls at night in elderly patients. The results of this study show that careful selection of sleep medications is required to prevent fall in elderly patients.

Incident reporting among physicians-in-training in Japan: A national survey.

BACKGROUND: Incident reporting can inform hospital safety. However, under-reporting is preventing this. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide survey among Japanese physicians-in-training by including a questionnaire in the General Medicine In-Training Examination to assess incident reporting behavior and participation in patient safety lectures. RESULTS: Responses of 6,164 physicians-in-training indicated that although 78% had attended patient safety lectures, 44% had not submitted an incident report in the previous year and 40.6% did not know how to submit an incident report. CONCLUSIONS: The discrepancy between attendance at safety courses and incident reporting behavior must be addressed to improve hospital safety.

Assessment of medical malpractice cost at a Japanese national university hospital.

Medical safety management has an economic dimension that has received little attention. Medical expenses associated with medical malpractice in Japan should be investigated in relation to patient safety measures and their consequences. We analyzed medical accidents that occurred within the past seven years at a university hospital. We determined that 197 accidents involved negligence by the hospital in the years from 2011 to 2017, for which the institution bore the costs of the resulting treatment; those expenses totaled JPY 30.547 million. Most incidents occurred in the hospital ward (82, 41.6%); those in the operating room were the most expensive (JPY 19.493 million, 63.8%). The greatest number of cases involved drug administration (63, 32.0%). Materials inadvertently left in surgical sites ("remnants") cost the hospital the most per incident (JPY 9.767 million, 32.0%). Of these, medical treatment costs for remnants associated with vascular invasion were the highest. Although the total number of malpractice incidents increased over time, the annual cost to the hospital decreased, especially in cases in which costs exceeded JPY 100,000, and those associated with the operating room. Our results suggested that adverse events must be addressed to foster patient safety, decrease medical expenses, and improve hospital administrative capacity.

Enhanced hospital-wide communication and interaction by team training to improve patient safety.

Communication errors are the most important cause of adverse events in healthcare. The current study aimed to improve hospital-wide employee teamwork and reduce adverse medical events for patients arising from miscommunication. In our hospital, when patient safety incidents and accidents occur, staff from various occupations submit incident reports to the Department of Patient Safety via an electronic reporting system; over 11,000 cases are reported each year. We surveyed the incident reports submitted in our institution from 2016 to 2018. All incidents related to miscommunication were identified, and relevant information was collected from the original electronic incident reports. Incident severity classification is commonly divided into near-miss or adverse events. We extracted only the required incident information items for this study, and processed information concerning individuals (e.g., reporters and target patients) anonymously. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the study hospital. The authors declare no conflicts of interest associated with this study. Team training for all employees reduced adverse events for patients. The coefficient of determination (R squared value) was -0.32. This suggests our approach may be slightly but significantly effective for developing the fundamental strengths of the medical team. Quality improvement is continuous, and seamless efforts to improve the effectiveness of medical teams at our hospital will continue.

Intervention efficacy for eliminating patient misidentification using step-by-step problem-solving procedures to improve patient safety.

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of interventions to reduce patient misidentification incidents classified as level 2 and over (adverse events occurred for patients) with the step-by-step problem-solving method. All incidents related to patient misidentification were selected, and relevant information was collected from the original electronic incident reports. We then conducted an eight-step problem-solving process with the aim of reducing patient misclassification and improving patient safety. Step 1: the number of misidentification-related incident reports and the percentage of these reports in the total incident reports increased each year. Step 2: the most frequent misidentification type was sample collection tubes, followed by drug administration and hospital meals. Step 3: we set a target of an 20% decrease in patient misidentification cases classified as level 2 or over compared with the previous year, and established this as a hospital priority. Step 4: we found that discrepancies in patient identification procedures were the most important causes of misidentification. Step 5: we standardized the patient identification process to achieve an 10% reduction in misidentification. Step 6: we disseminated instructional videos to all staff members. Step 7: we confirmed there was an 18% reduction in level 2 and over patient misidentification compared with the previous year. Step 8: we intend to make additional effort to decrease misidentification of patients by a further 10%. Level 2 and over patient misidentification can be reduced by a patient identification policy using a step-by-step problem-solving procedure. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of interventions to reduce patient misidentification incidents with step-by-step problem-solving method. Continued seamless efforts to eliminate patient misidentification are mandatory for this activity.

Significance of incident reports by medical doctors for organizational transparency and driving forces for patient safety.

BACKGROUND: Incident reporting is an effective strategy used to enhance patient safety and quality improvement in healthcare. An incident is an event that could eventually result in harm to a patient. The aim of this study is to re-evaluate the importance of reporting by medical doctors to improve quality in healthcare and patient safety. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the reported incidents registered in our institutional database from April 1st 2015 to March 31st 2019, classified according to eight variables proposed by the National University Hospital Council of Japan, to determine the type of incidents and their potential harm to patients. RESULTS: Registered reports totalled 43,775, approximately 8% of which arise annually from medical doctors in clinical departments. Incidents with higher impact on patients have significantly increased the rate of reporting by medical doctors. The most frequent types of report overall concerned medication incidents, followed by infusion lines, drainage-tube devices, cure, examination, and treatment outside the operating room. The most frequent reports by medical doctors involved operation-related incidents, followed by cure, examination, treatment outside the operation room, and medications. CONCLUSION: Reporting by medical doctors reflects the organizational transparency and the driving forces behind patient safety and quality improvement in healthcare. Efforts toward seamless improvement in patient safety and quality at our hospital continue apace.

Characteristics of falls in orthopedic patients during hospitalization.

Falls are common in elderly patients and comprise 20-30% of all incident reports in hospitals. The current study examined falls in orthopedic patients among 212,617 inpatients admitted to our hospital from April 2012 to March 2017, using a prospective database in the hospital event reporting system. The risk of fall was evaluated using a fall assessment scoresheet at admission and during hospitalization, based on which patients were divided into risk grades 1, 2 and 3. Fall leading to fracture or a life-threatening injury was defined as an adverse event. The number of falls during the study period was 3,925, including 230 in orthopedic patients. Fall cases occurred at all times, but adverse events were significantly more common from 1-7 a.m. (67% vs. 24%, p<0.01). Patients hospitalized for orthopedic surgery had significantly higher fall rates compared to all other patients (3.12% vs. 1.80%, p<0.01), and were older (65.8 vs. 61.4 years, p<0.05) and more frequently >80 years old (23.4% vs. 17.9%, p<0.05). There was a significant difference in fall incidence between risk grades 2 and 3 for patients hospitalized for non-orthopedic surgery, but not for patients hospitalized for orthopedic surgery. We conclude that fall can occur in orthopedic patients with a low predicted risk of fall, and particularly for older patients. This may indicate that frequent specialized fall assessment is desirable after orthopedic surgery.

Characteristics of outpatient falls that occurred in hospital.

A fall may cause trauma and bone fracture, which can affect ADL and QOL. Therefore, countermeasures to prevent falls are important. There are many reports on falls in hospitalized patients, but few for outpatients. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to report the characteristics of outpatient falls that occurred in hospital over five years to identify factors associated with fall in these patients. From April 2012 to March 2017, we investigated fall cases in outpatients using a hospital database. Fall that led to fracture or a life-threatening injury was defined as an adverse event. A total of 3,758 patients had falls in the hospital, and this included 146 outpatients, giving an incidence of 3.9% (146/3,758). Most falls involved outpatients in their 70s, and most occurred in operating rooms (15%), followed by examination rooms (13%), escalators (10%), and waiting rooms (7%). Falls in neurology patients accounted for 12%, followed by neurosurgery (10%), and ophthalmology (8%). Among all falls, 5% occurred in patients wearing slippers, and 54% and 46% occurred in patients without and with a need for assistance with mobility, respectively. There were 6 adverse events (4%) due to fall in outpatients: 4 femoral neck fractures, 1 teeth injury, and 1 pubic bone fracture. In conclusion, a fall accident occurs most commonly in outpatients suffering from a neurological disease and in ophthalmologic outpatients aged about 70 years old, and is likely to occur in the operating room, examination room, escalator and waiting room. Our findings suggest that countermeasures for each location are necessary.

Measures and effects on prevention of fall: the role of a fall working group at a university hospital.

Fall in hospitalized patients can cause trauma and fractures, which can reduce ADL and QOL, whereas prevention of fall decreases medical expenses. The purpose of this study is to examine prevention of fall due to intervention from a fall working group established in our hospital. The working group focused on three main points. First, colored wrist bands for patients classified as grade 3 risk for fall are used to alert medical staff. Second, information on fall prevention was distributed to patients. Third, standardization of two bed fences and reduced use of slippers for inpatients have been introduced. We investigated falls during hospitalization for 5 years from April 2012 to March 2017. The risk of fall was evaluated as grade 1 (mild) to grade 3 (severe) using an assessment sheet developed by the working group. The incidence of fall decreased over time, with a significant decrease from 2.1% in 2012 to 1.3% in 2016 (p<0.01). Slipper use in fall cases showed a significant decrease from 45.8% in 2012 to 11.0% in 2016 (p<0.01). Among all falls, the percentage of cases with fall risks grade 1 and 2 decreased, while that for grade 3 risk increased from 32.0% in 2012 to 40.3% in 2016 (p<0.05). These results support the efforts of the fall working group have reduced the overall incidence of fall. However, fall in patients with grade 3 risk has not decreased, which suggests that better sharing of information is needed for patients at high risk for fall.

Incidence and characteristics of accidental falls in hospitalizations.

Aging of the patient population has led to increased occurrence of accidental falls in acute care settings. The aim of this study is to survey the annual occurrence of falls in a university hospital, and to examine procedures to prevent fall. A total of 49,059 inpatients were admitted to our hospital from April 2015 to March 2016. A fall assessment scale was developed to estimate the risk of fall at admission. Data on falls were obtained from the hospital incident reporting system. There were fall-related incidents in 826 patients (1.7%). Most falls occurred in hospital rooms (67%). Adverse events occurred in 101 patients who fell (12%) and were significantly more frequent in patients aged ≥80 years old and in those wearing slippers. The incidence of falls was also significantly higher in patients in the highest risk group. These results support the validity of the risk assessment scale for predicting accidental falls in an acute treatment setting. The findings also clarify the demographic and environmental factors and consequences associated with fall. These results of the study could provide important information for designing effective interventions to prevent fall in elderly patients.

Analysis of falls that caused serious events in hospitalized patients.

AIM: Falls are common adverse events for hospitalized elderly patients that can cause fracture, which decreases activities of daily living, and other injuries that can be fatal. The purpose of the present study was to investigate serious events due to fall, and to consider measures for fall prevention. METHODS: Incidents of fall were obtained from a database of 163 558 inpatients at Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan, from April 2012 to March 2016. The risk of fall was evaluated using a fall assessment score sheet at admission and during hospitalization, based on which patients were divided into risk grades 1, 2 and 3. A fall that led to fracture or a life-threatening injury was defined as a serious event. RESULTS: Fall occurred in 3099 patients for 4 years (1.89%). Most patients that fell (45%) were in the highest (grade 3) risk category. Serious events associated with fall occurred in 36 of the 3099 patients (1.2%), and the overall incidence of serious events was 0.22%. These events included fracture in 24 patients, intracranial injury in 10 patients and others in two patients. Finally, one patient died. Serious events occurred significantly more frequently after falls in patients wearing slippers compared with other footwear (P < 0.01). The incidences of serious events and fall were significantly higher in patients with a higher risk of fall (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The present results support the validity of our risk assessment scale for fall, but it should be recognized that fall can also occur in a patient with a low predicted risk of fall. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2017; 17: 2403-2406.

Analysis of Incident and Accident Reports and Risk Management in Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: A review of accident and incident reports. OBJECTIVE: To analyze prevalence, characteristics, and details of perioperative incidents and accidents in patients receiving spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In our institution, a clinical error that potentially results in an adverse event is usually submitted as an incident or accident report through a web database, to ensure anonymous and blame-free reporting. All reports are analyzed by a medical safety management group. These reports contain valuable data for management of medical safety, but there have been no studies evaluating such data for spine surgery. METHODS: A total of 320 incidents and accidents that occurred perioperatively in 172 of 415 spine surgeries were included in the study. Incidents were defined as events that were "problematic, but with no damage to the patient," and accidents as events "with damage to the patient." The details of these events were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 278 incidents in 137 surgeries and 42 accidents in 35 surgeries, giving prevalence of 33% (137/415) and 8% (35/415), respectively. The proportion of accidents among all events was significantly higher for doctors than non-doctors [68.0% (17/25) vs. 8.5% (25/295), P < 0.01] and in the operating room compared with outside the operating room [40.5% (15/37) vs. 9.5% (27/283), P < 0.01]. There was no significant difference in years of experience among personnel involved in all events. The major types of events were medication-related, line and tube problems, and falls and slips. Accidents also occurred because of a long-term prone position, with complications such as laryngeal edema, ulnar nerve palsy, and tooth damage. CONCLUSION: Surgery and procedures in the operating room always have a risk of complications. Therefore, a particular effort is needed to establish safe management of this environment and to provide advice on risk to the doctor and medical care team. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.