Malpractice Claims and Incident Reporting: Two Faces of the Same Coin?

Incident reporting is an important method to identify risks because learning from the reports is crucial in developing and implementing effective improvements. A medical malpractice claims analysis is an important tool in any case. Both incident reports and claims show cases of damage caused to patients, despite incident reporting comprising near misses, cases where no event occurred and no-harm events. We therefore compare the two worlds to assess whether they are similar or definitively different. From 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2021, the claims database of Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS collected 843 claims. From 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2021, the incident-reporting database collected 1919 events. In order to compare the two, we used IBNR calculation, usually adopted by the insurance industry to determine loss to a company and to evaluate the real number of adverse events that occurred. Indeed, the number of reported adverse events almost overlapped with the total number of events, which is indicative that incurred-but-not-reported events are practically irrelevant. The distribution of damage events reported as claims in the period from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2021 and related to incidents that occurred in the months of the same period, grouped by quarter, was then compared with the distribution of damage events reported as adverse events and sentinel events in the same period, grouped by quarter. The analysis of the claims database showed that the claims trend is slightly decreasing. However, the analysis of the reports database showed that, in the period 2020-2021, the reports trend was increasing. In our study, the comparison of the two, malpractice claims and incident reporting, documented many differences and weak areas of overlap. Nevertheless, this contribution represents the first attempt to compare the two and new studies focusing on single types of adverse events are, therefore, desirable.

Medico-Legal Aspects of Hospital-Acquired Infections: 5-Years of Judgements of the Civil Court of Rome.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) represent a risk to patients' health, as well as being an issue of worldwide relevance in terms of public health and increased healthcare costs. The occurrence of a complication causally related to the development of an infection contracted during a hospital stay, or in any event during a healthcare activity, may represent a source of liability for the healthcare facility itself and, therefore, lead to compensation for the injured patient. The aim of this research is to analyze the phenomenon of professional liability related to HAIs, to emphasize its economic and juridical aspects and, at the same time, highlight the clinical-managerial issues deserving attention, in order to guarantee the safety of care for patients. METHODS: The retrospective review concerned all the judgments regarding HAIs drawn up by the Judges of the Civil Court of Rome, published between January 2016 and December 2020. RESULTS: In the five-year period considered, 140 verdicts were issued in which the liability for which compensation was sought was related to the occurrence of healthcare-related infections. Convictions were recognized in 62.8%. The most involved branches were those related to the surgical areas: orthopedics, heart surgery, and general surgery. The three most frequently isolated organisms were Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Klebsiella pneumoniae. The total amount of compensation paid was EUR 21.243.184,43. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed how the analysis of the juridical and medico legal aspects of HAIs may represent not only a helpful tool for healthcare performance assessment, but also a data source usable in clinical risk management and in the implementation of patient safety.

Governance for Patient Safety: A Framework of Strategy Domains for Risk Management.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events in healthcare are primarily due to system failures rather than individuals. Risk reduction strategies should therefore focus on strengthening systems, bringing about improvements in governance, and targeting individual practices or products. The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review to develop a global framework of management strategies for sustaining a safety-oriented culture in healthcare organizations, focusing on patient safety and the adoption of good safety-related practices. METHODS: We conducted a search on safety-related strategies in 2 steps. The first involved a search in the PubMed database to identify effective, broadly framed, cross-sector domains relevant to clinical risk management strategies in healthcare systems. In the second step, we then examined the strategies adopted by running a scoping review for each domain. RESULTS: Our search identified 8 strategy domains relevant to patient safety: transformational leadership, patient engagement, human resources management quality, innovation technology, skills certification, education in patient safety, teamwork, and effective communication. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review explores management strategies key to healthcare systems' efforts to create safety-oriented organizations. Improvement efforts should focus particularly on the domains identified: combined together, they would nurture an overall safety-oriented culture and have an impact on preventable adverse events.