An epistemology of patient safety research: a framework for study design and interpretation. Part 3. End points and measurement

被引:80
作者
Brown, C. [1 ]
Hofer, T. [2 ]
Johal, A. [1 ]
Thomson, R. [3 ,4 ]
Nicholl, J. [5 ]
Franklin, B. D. [6 ]
Lilford, R. J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Birmingham, Dept Publ Hlth & Epidemiol, Birmingham B15 2TT, W Midlands, England
[2] Univ Michigan, Sch Med, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[3] Natl Patient Safety Agcy, London, England
[4] Med Sch Newcastle Upon Tyne, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE2 4HH, Tyne & Wear, England
[5] Univ Sheffield, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
[6] Univ London Sch Pharm, London, England
来源
QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE | 2008年 / 17卷 / 03期
关键词
D O I
10.1136/qshc.2007.023655
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
This article builds on the previous two articles in this series, which focused on an evaluation framework and study designs for patient safety research. The current article focuses on what to measure as evidence of safety and how these measurements can be undertaken. It considers four different end points, highlighting their methodological advantages and disadvantages: patient outcomes, fidelity, intervening variables and clinical error. The choice of end point depends on the nature of the intervention being evaluated and the patient safety problem it has been designed to address. This paper also discusses the different methods of measuring error, reviewing best practice and paying particular attention to case note review. Two key issues with any method of data collection are ensuring construct validity and reliability. Since no end point or method of data collection is infallible, the present authors advocate the use of multiple end points and methods where feasible.
引用
收藏
页码:170 / 177
页数:8
相关论文
共 68 条
[1]  
Altman DG., 1990, PRACTICAL STAT MED R
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1931, Industrial Accident Prevention
[3]  
[Anonymous], PATIENT SAFETY RES P
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2003, QUAL SAF HEALTH CARE, DOI [DOI 10.1136/QHC.12.SUPPL_2.II8, 10.1136/qhc.12.suppl_2.ii8]
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2004, 7 STEPS PAT SAF
[6]  
[Anonymous], REV VALIDITY RELIABI
[7]  
BARBER N, 2006, EVALUATING ELECT PRE
[8]   Rates of spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions in France [J].
Bégaud, B ;
Martin, K ;
Haramburu, F ;
Moore, N .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2002, 288 (13) :1588-1588
[9]   Organization and representation of patient safety data: Current status and issues around generalizability and scalability [J].
Boxwala, AA ;
Dieks, M ;
Keenan, M ;
Jackson, S ;
Hanscom, R ;
Bates, DW ;
Sato, L .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 2004, 11 (06) :468-478
[10]   INCIDENCE OF ADVERSE EVENTS AND NEGLIGENCE IN HOSPITALIZED-PATIENTS - RESULTS OF THE HARVARD MEDICAL-PRACTICE STUDY-I [J].
BRENNAN, TA ;
LEAPE, LL ;
LAIRD, NM ;
HEBERT, L ;
LOCALIO, AR ;
LAWTHERS, AG ;
NEWHOUSE, JP ;
WEILER, PC ;
HIATT, HH .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1991, 324 (06) :370-376