scholarly journals Never events: Patient safety definitions

BDJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 225 (9) ◽  
pp. 795-796
Author(s):  
E. Ensaldo-Carrasco ◽  
A. Carson-Stevens ◽  
K. Cresswell ◽  
R. Bedi ◽  
A. Sheikh
Keyword(s):  
2010 ◽  
Vol 2010 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Subramanian Vaidyanathan ◽  
Bakul M. Soni ◽  
Peter L. Hughes ◽  
Gurpreet Singh ◽  
Tun Oo

Never Events are serious, largely preventable patient safety incidents that should not occur if the available preventative measures have been implemented. We propose that a list of “Never Events” is created for spinal cord injury patients in order to improve the quality of care. To begin with, following two preventable complications related to management of neuropathic bladder may be included in this list of “Never Events.” (i) Severe ventral erosion of glans penis and penile shaft caused by indwelling urethral catheter; (ii) incorrect placement of a Foley catheter leading to inflation of Foley balloon in urethra. If a Never Event occurs, health professionals should report the incident through hospital risk management system to National Patient Safety Agency's Reporting and Learning System, communicate with the patient, family, and their carer as soon as possible about the incident, undertake a comprehensive root cause analysis of what went wrong, how, and why, and implement the changes that have been identified and agreed following the root cause analysis.


Resuscitation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 96 ◽  
pp. 122-123
Author(s):  
Hartwig Marung ◽  
Heinzpeter Moecke ◽  
Stefan Poloczek ◽  
Matthias Lenz

2016 ◽  
Vol 05 (01) ◽  
pp. E83-E89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manmeet Matharoo ◽  
Adam Haycock ◽  
Nick Sevdalis ◽  
Siwan Thomas-Gibson

Abstract Background and study aims Medical error occurs frequently with significant morbidity and mortality. This study aime to assess the frequency and type of endoscopy patient safety incidents (PSIs). Patients and methods A prospective observational study of PSIs in routine diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy was undertaken in a secondary and tertiary care center. Observations were undertaken within the endoscopy suite across pre-procedure, intra-procedure and post-procedure phases of care. Experienced (Consultant-level) and trainee endoscopists from medical, surgical, and nursing specialities were included. PSIs were defined as any safety issue that had the potential to or directly adversely affected patient care: PSIs included near misses, complications, adverse events and “never events”. PSIs were reviewed by an expert panel and categorized for severity and nature via expert consensus. Results One hundred and forty procedures (92 diagnostic, 48 therapeutic) over 37 lists (experienced operators n = 25, trainees n = 12) were analyzed. One hundred forty PSIs were identified (median 1 per procedure, range 0 – 7). Eighty-six PSIs (61 %) occurred in 48 therapeutic procedures. Zero PSIs were detected in 13 diagnostic procedures. 21 (15 %) PSIs were categorized as severe and 12 (9 %) had the potential to be “never events,” including patient misidentification and wrong procedure. Forty PSIs (28 %) were of intermediate severity and 78 (56 %) were minor. Oxygen monitoring PSIs occurred most frequently. Conclusion This is the first study documenting the range and frequency of PSIs in endoscopy. Although many errors are minor without immediate consequence, further work should identify whether prevention of such recurrent errors affects the incidence of severe errors, thus improving safety and quality.


2021 ◽  
pp. postgradmedj-2020-139609
Author(s):  
Wai Yoong ◽  
Hashviniya Sekar ◽  
Maud Nauta ◽  
Helienke Yoong ◽  
Tomas Lopes

We explore how engagement with checklists and adoption of a strict ‘checking’ discipline help avoid unintentional individual, team and systemic errors. Paradoxically, this is equally important when performing repetitive mundane tasks as well as during times of high-stress workload. In this article, we aim to discuss the different types of checklists and explain how deviations from a ‘checking’ discipline can lead to never events such as wrong side or site surgery. Well-designed checklists function as mental notes and prompts in clinical situations where the combination of fatigue and stress can contribute to a decline in cognitive performance. Furthermore, the need for proactive discussion by all members of the team during the implementation of the surgical checklist also reinforces the concept of teamwork and contributes towards effective communication. Patient safety is often a product of good communication, teamwork and anticipation: a ‘checking’ mentality remains the lynchpin which links these factors.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (SP) ◽  
pp. 46-57
Author(s):  
Hina Laeeque ◽  
Barb Farlow ◽  
Sandi Kossey
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (19) ◽  
pp. 1134-1135
Author(s):  
John Tingle
Keyword(s):  

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 223-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Odom-Forren
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document