Back to Search
Start Over
Measurement of patient safety: a systematic review of the reliability and validity of adverse event detection with record review
- Source :
- BMJ Open, 6, e011078, BMJ Open, BMJ Open, 6(8):e011078. BMJ Publishing Group, BMJ Open, 6, 8, pp. e011078, Hanskamp-Sebregts, M, Zegers, M, Vincent, C, van Gurp, P J, de Vet, H C W & Wollersheim, H 2016, ' Measurement of patient safety: a systematic review of the reliability and validity of adverse event detection with record review ', BMJ Open, vol. 6, no. 8, e011078 . https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011078
- Publication Year :
- 2016
-
Abstract
- Contains fulltext : 170948.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) OBJECTIVES: Record review is the most used method to quantify patient safety. We systematically reviewed the reliability and validity of adverse event detection with record review. DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library and from their inception through February 2015. We included all studies that aimed to describe the reliability and/or validity of record review. Two reviewers conducted data extraction. We pooled kappa values (kappa) and analysed the differences in subgroups according to number of reviewers, reviewer experience and training level, adjusted for the prevalence of adverse events. RESULTS: In 25 studies, the psychometric data of the Global Trigger Tool (GTT) and the Harvard Medical Practice Study (HMPS) were reported and 24 studies were included for statistical pooling. The inter-rater reliability of the GTT and HMPS showed a pooled kappa of 0.65 and 0.55, respectively. The inter-rater agreement was statistically significantly higher when the group of reviewers within a study consisted of a maximum five reviewers. We found no studies reporting on the validity of the GTT and HMPS. CONCLUSIONS: The reliability of record review is moderate to substantial and improved when a small group of reviewers carried out record review. The validity of the record review method has never been evaluated, while clinical data registries, autopsy or direct observations of patient care are potential reference methods that can be used to test concurrent validity.
- Subjects :
- medicine.medical_specialty
Safety Management
Concurrent validity
PsycINFO
CINAHL
Cochrane Library
Medical Records
Healthcare improvement science Radboud Institute for Health Sciences [Radboudumc 18]
03 medical and health sciences
Patient safety
0302 clinical medicine
Medicine
Humans
Medical physics
030212 general & internal medicine
Reliability (statistics)
Observer Variation
Analysis of Variance
Medical Errors
business.industry
030503 health policy & services
Research
Training level
Metabolic Disorders Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences [Radboudumc 6]
General Medicine
Data extraction
Health Services Research
Patient Safety
0305 other medical science
business
Subjects
Details
- ISSN :
- 20446055
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- BMJ Open, 6, e011078, BMJ Open, BMJ Open, 6(8):e011078. BMJ Publishing Group, BMJ Open, 6, 8, pp. e011078, Hanskamp-Sebregts, M, Zegers, M, Vincent, C, van Gurp, P J, de Vet, H C W & Wollersheim, H 2016, ' Measurement of patient safety: a systematic review of the reliability and validity of adverse event detection with record review ', BMJ Open, vol. 6, no. 8, e011078 . https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011078
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....cf21b409c7cc24b83dea199f9c6febb7