A national study of the causes, consequences and amelioration of adverse events in the use of MRI, CT, and conventional radiography in Norway
| Autor: | Geir Bukholm, Åshild M Bose, Jonn Terje Geitung, Ida Rashida Khan Bukholm |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Male medicine.medical_specialty Adolescent Computed tomography 030218 nuclear medicine & medical imaging 03 medical and health sciences Patient safety Young Adult 0302 clinical medicine medicine Humans Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging 030212 general & internal medicine Diagnostic Errors Adverse effect Child Aged Aged 80 and over Radiological and Ultrasound Technology medicine.diagnostic_test business.industry Norway Magnetic resonance imaging General Medicine Middle Aged Magnetic Resonance Imaging Conventional radiography Cross-Sectional Studies Compensation and Redress National study Female Radiology Patient Safety business Tomography X-Ray Computed |
| Zdroj: | Acta radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden : 1987). 61(6) |
| ISSN: | 1600-0455 |
| Popis: | Background Rapid technological developments, increased complexity, and increased demand have made patient safety a challenge in radiology. Purpose To uncover the causes and consequences behind patient injury compensation claims in the use of MRI, CT, and conventional X-ray examinations, and to determine the system factors that need to be focused on in order to prevent these events. Material and Methods This descriptive cross-sectional study uses data acquired from The Norwegian System of Patient Injury Compensation. A total of 240 cases from 2012–2016 were included. Results According to our study, the main factors contributing to patient injury compensation claims in radiology were false-negative findings (48.7%), misinterpretation (13.1%), and “satisfaction of search” (12%). Another source of error was routines (8.7%), mainly where the patient should have been (further) examined using another modality. Other causes were related to communication (7.6%), procedures (2.9%), technical factors (2.5%), organizational and management factors (1.5%), competence (0.7%), location of the lesion (0.7%), patient factors (0.7%), false-positive findings (0.4%), and work environment (0.4%). These events led to delayed diagnosis and/or treatment in the range of 0–3650 days. Conclusion Errors of perception (false negative and “satisfaction of search”) and cognitive errors (misinterpretation) were the main reasons behind patient injury compensation claims in radiology. We suggest that a combination of double-reading, specialization, increased collaboration between professionals, as well as a reduction of unnecessary examinations should be considered to reduce adverse events in radiology. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|