Relationship Between the Likelihood of Reporting Adverse Events Among Nursing Officers and Their Perceptions on Identified Barriers and Enablers for Reporting
AbstractIn order to improve patient safety in hospital setups, learning from previous errors is important. Therefore the institute should have adequate data on adverse events which have occurred in their settings. The way of gathering those data is Adverse Event Reporting. The objective of this study was to measure the relationship between the likelihood of reporting adverse events by Nursing Officers in Medical, Surgical, Paediatric, Gynaecology and Obstetrics wards in the Teaching Hospital, Kandy and their perception on selected barriers and enablers, as identified in literature, for adverse event reporting. This was a quantitative study, and the study instrument was a validated self-administered questionnaire with a six point likert scale. Nursing officers working in Medical, Surgical, Paediatric, Gynaecology and Obstetrics wards in the Teaching Hospital, Kandy were the study population. The whole population was taken to this study as it is below the calculated sample size. Correlations between the likelihood of reporting adverse events was measured with the participants’ perceptions on their training on adverse event reporting, leadership, feedback received for reported adverse events, knowledge on adverse event reporting, presence of culture of blame and the existing process of adverse event reporting. The response rate for the questionnaire was 69% (n=277).There was statistically significant positive moderate correlation between the participants’ likelihood of incident reporting and their perception on the process of reporting an adverse event (r = 0.591). Their perceptions on leadership (r = 0.472), perceived knowledge on incident reporting (r = 0.462), perception on feedback received for reported incidents (r = 0.438), perceived training received for incident reporting (r = 0.378) and the perception of the presence of culture of blame (r = 0.164) showed weak positive correlations with their likelihood of reporting adverse events. Simplification of the process of adverse event reporting can be recommended to improve incident reporting in these selected wards in the Teaching Hospital, Kandy.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, “What Is Quality and Why Is It Important?” [Online]. Available:https://archive.ahrq.gov/chip/content/monitoring_evaluation/quality_measurement-what_is.htm.
Carol M Ashton, Deborah J Del Junco, Julianne Souchek, “The Association between the Quality of Inpatient Care and Early Readmission: A Meta-Analysis of the Evidence,” Med. Care, vol. 35, no. 10, pp. 1044–1059, 1997.
E. Martin, “Eliminating Waste in Healthcare Strategies to improve outcomes and reduce costs,” ASQ Healthcare Update, no. July, 2014.
IOM, “Crossing the Quality Chasm,” National Academy of Sciences, no. March, pp. 2–3, 2001.
WHO, “Patient Safety Workshop,” Learning from Error, 2008.
WHO, “The World Alliance for Patient Safety,” in Patient Safety, vol. 28, no. 5, Geneva: orld Health Organization, 2004, pp. 16–22.
Ministry of Health Sri and Lanka, Policy Repository. 2015, p. 142.
Ministry of Health Sri Lanka, Implementation of Adverse Event Reporting & Readmission Forms. 2016.
C. Vincent, Stanhope N, “Reasons for not reporting adverse events: an empirical study,” J. Eval. Clin. Pract., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 13–21, 1999.
Y. Pfeiffer, T. Manser, and T. Wehner, “Conceptualising barriers to incident reporting : a psychological framework,” Br. Med. J., no. June, 2009.
J. J. Waring, “Beyond blame: Cultural barriers to medical incident reporting,” Soc. Sci. Med., vol. 60, no. 9, pp. 1927–1935, 2005.
K. Martowirono, J. D. Jansma, S. J. Van Luijk, C. Wagner, and A. B. Bijnen, “Possible solutions for barriers in incident reporting by residents,” J. Eval. Clin. Pract., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 76–81, 2012.
J. G. B. Marilyn J Kingston, Sue M Evans, “Attitudes of doctors and nurses towards incident reporting: a qualitative analysis,” Med. J. Aust., vol. 181, no. 1, pp. 36–39, 2004.
A. Al joharah Al obaikan, Zayed, A. Benayan, H. I. Al, and A. Al, “Incident Reporting and its Impact on Quality of Health Care Services in Riyadh , Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” Am. J. Res. Commun., vol. 3, no. 1, 2015.
N. C. Elder, D. Graham, E. Brandt, and J. Hickner, “Barriers and motivators for making error reports from family medicine offices.,” J. Am. Board Fam. Med., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 115–123, 2007.
J. Hellgren, M. Mattson, and M. Idoeta-, “The role of leadership attitudes for safety awareness , incident reporting and actual events,” 2013.
Crisis Prevention Institute, Critical Incident Reporting. 2000.
S. K. Lwanga, Sample Size Determination in Health Studies. World Health Organization, 1991.
D. M. Evans SM, Berry JG, Smith BJ, Esterman A, Selim P, O’Shaughnessy J, “No Title,” BMJ Qual. Saf. Heal. Care, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 39–43, 2006.
Authors who submit papers with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
- By submitting the processing fee, it is understood that the author has agreed to our terms and conditions which may change from time to time without any notice.
- It should be clear for authors that the Editor In Chief is responsible for the final decision about the submitted papers; have the right to accept\reject any paper. The Editor In Chief will choose any option from the following to review the submitted papers:A. send the paper to two reviewers, if the results were negative by one reviewer and positive by the other one; then the editor may send the paper for third reviewer or he take immediately the final decision by accepting\rejecting the paper. The Editor In Chief will ask the selected reviewers to present the results within 7 working days, if they were unable to complete the review within the agreed period then the editor have the right to resend the papers for new reviewers using the same procedure. If the Editor In Chief was not able to find suitable reviewers for certain papers then he have the right to accept\reject the paper.B. sends the paper to a selected editorial board member(s). C. the Editor In Chief himself evaluates the paper.
- Author will take the responsibility what so ever if any copyright infringement or any other violation of any law is done by publishing the research work by the author
- Before publishing, author must check whether this journal is accepted by his employer, or any authority he intends to submit his research work. we will not be responsible in this matter.
- If at any time, due to any legal reason, if the journal stops accepting manuscripts or could not publish already accepted manuscripts, we will have the right to cancel all or any one of the manuscripts without any compensation or returning back any kind of processing cost.
- The cost covered in the publication fees is only for online publication of a single manuscript.