期刊文献+

英美骨科医疗不良事件报告系统的比较研究 被引量:2

A Comparative Study of Orthopedic Medical Adverse Events Reporting System in UK and USA
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的对比分析英美两国骨科不良事件报告系统的管理和组织机构内容,为我国骨科医疗不良事件报告系统的建立提供借鉴。方法通过检索Pubmed、Embase等文献数据库和英美骨科联合会等官方网站,搜集相关文献资料。结果最终纳入文献17篇,其中官方文献6篇。研究发现,美国建立了骨科研究院,与社会各方广泛合作,机构组织紧密,规章制度完善,对全国的骨科不良事件进行报告管理;英国则在国家病人安全机构中下设骨科管理部门,由国家主导医疗不良事件的报告。结论英美两国骨科医疗安全事件报告系统均较为完善,组织机构设置清晰,职能明确;上报内容系统全面,重点突出;规章制度完善;上报与反馈机制健全等。两国的成功经验对我国骨科不良事件报告系统的建立健全具有借鉴意义。 Objective To compare the management and organization of Orthopedics Adverse Event Reporting System in UK and USA, provide a reference for the establishment of orthopedic medical adverse event reporting system in China. Method We retrieved PubMed, Embase, the official website of Anglo - American Orthopedics Association and other bibliographic databases to collect relevant literatures. Result Totally 17 literatures were included, including six official literatures. The USA established the orthopedics Association, extensive cooperated with all sectors of society, institutions and organizations with improved rules and regulations, which manages orthopedic adverse event reports all over the country. While in the United Kingdom, orthopedic man- agement sector is set up under the national patient safety agencies, dominated by the state medical adverse events reported. Con- clusion The orthopedic medical safety event reporting systems are well established in UK and USA with clear organization, well defined functions ; comprehensive report system with focused issues ; well regulations ; sound report and feedback mechanism. The successful experience of the two countries provides a sound reference to China on orthopedic adverse event reporting system.
出处 《中国卫生质量管理》 2012年第4期53-56,共4页 Chinese Health Quality Management
基金 中澳卫生与艾滋病项目(CAHHF)基金"医疗安全风险管理与预警监测体系研究"子课题
关键词 英美两国 骨科医疗不良事件 报告系统 对比借鉴 UK and USA Orthopedic Medical Adverse Events Reporting System Comparison
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

  • 1AAOS. Mission Statement [ EB/OL]. http://aaos, org/about/mission, asp,2012 -03 - 15.
  • 2California Orthopaedic /Lss~iation Committee Structure[ EB/OL]. http://www, aaos. org/govern/state/organizationaltools/orgstrueture/ orgstrueture, asp ,2012 -03 - 15.
  • 3NPSA Structure Chart. 2007 [ EB/ OL 1. http ://npsa. nhs. uk/EasysiteWeb/ getre- source, axd? AssetlD 1022&type Full&servicetype = Attachment, 2012 - 03 - 15.
  • 4the National Patient Safety Agency. Corporate home About us [ EB/OL ]. Http :// www. npsa. t~s. uk/About us/,.2009 -07 -20.
  • 5Wong, D. A., J.H. Hemdon, S. T. Canale, et al. Medical Errors in Orthopae- dics: Results of an AAOS Member Survey [ J ]. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, 2009,91 (3) :547 -557.
  • 6Giles S. , G. A. Cook, M. A. Jones, et al. Evaluating the effectiveness of a multi - professionally agreed list of adverse events for clinical incident reporting in Trauma and Ortho- paedics : A follow - up study [ J ]. Clinical Gov- ernance: An International Journal, 2005, 10 (3) :217 -230.
  • 7Gould, M. T. , M.J. Langworthy, R. Santore, M.T. Proveneher. An analysis of orthopaedic liability in the acute care setting [ J]. Clinical orthopaedics and related researeh, 2003 (407) :59.
  • 8Giles, S., G. Cook, M. Jones, et al. Developing a muhi -professionally agreed list of adverse events for clinical incident repor- ting in trauma and orthopaedics [ J ]. Clinical Governance: An International Journal,2004, 9 (4) :225 -230.
  • 9MedWatch:Your link to adve~e e- vent reporting [ EB/OL]. http://www, aaos. org/ news/ bulletin/ maraprO7 / reimbursement4. asp ,2012 -03 - 15.
  • 10William M. Mihalko, M., PhD. Reporting and Notification of Adverse Events in Orthopaedics [ J ]. Journal of the American Acad- emy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 2010, 18 (4) : 193 - 198.

同被引文献39

  • 1张素敏,曹立亚,曾光.世界各国医疗器械不良事件监测现状比较[J].中国医疗器械信息,2005,11(6):52-56. 被引量:29
  • 2马建兵,刘淼,姚建锋.人工髋关节置换并发假体周围骨折的临床分析[J].中国矫形外科杂志,2007,15(20):1527-1530. 被引量:12
  • 3Peck M. To Err Is Human[J]. Jour- nal of Financial Planning,2006,19 ( 2 ) : 12.
  • 4Merino P, Alvarez J, Martin M C, et al. Adverse events in Spanish intensive care u- nits: the SYREC study [ J ]. International Journal for Quality in Health Care,2012,24 ( 2 ) : 105 - 113.
  • 5Cole, A.P, L. Block,A.W. Wu. On higher ground: ethical reasoning and its re- lationship with error disclosure[ J]. BMJ Quality & Safety,2013,22(7) :580-585.
  • 6Michel P,Quenon J L,Djihoud A,et al. French national survey of inpatient adverse e- vents prospectively assessed with ward staff[ J 3. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 2007, 16 (5) :369 -377.
  • 7Soop M, Fryksmark U, Koster M, et al. The incidence of adverse events in Swedish hospitals: a retrospective medical record review study[ J]. International Journal for Quality in Health Care,2009,21 (4) :285 - 291.
  • 8Aranaz Andres J M, Aibar Remon C,Vitaller Murillo J, et al. Incidence of adverse events related to health care in Spain : results of the Spanish National Study of Adverse Events [ J ]. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health,2008,62(12) :1022 - 1029.
  • 9Kobayashi M, Ikeda S, Kitazawan N, et al. Validity of retrospective review of medi- cal records as a means of identifying adverse e- vents: comparison between medical records and accident reports[ J]. J Eval Clin Pract,2008,14 (1) :126 -130.
  • 10Institute for Healthcare Improve- ment. History of IHI [ EB/OL]. http://www. ihi. org/about/pages/history, aspx,2015.

引证文献2

二级引证文献3

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部