Top

Pediatric Radiology

Published in:

01-12-2018 | Original Article

Gauging potential risk for patients in pediatric radiology by review of over 2,000 incident reports

Authors: Elizabeth J. Snyder, Wei Zhang, Kimberly Chua Jasmin, Sam Thankachan, Lane F. Donnelly

Published in: Pediatric Radiology | Issue 13/2018

Abstract

Background

Incident reporting can be used to inform imaging departments about adverse events and near misses.

Objective

To study incident reports submitted during a 5-year period at a large pediatric imaging system to evaluate which imaging modalities and other factors were associated with a greater rate of filed incident reports.

Materials and methods

All incident reports filed between 2013 and 2017 were reviewed and categorized by modality, patient type (inpatient, outpatient or emergency center) and use of sedation/anesthesia. The number of incident reports was compared to the number of imaging studies performed during that time period to calculate an incident report rate for each factor. Statistical analysis of whether there were differences in these rates between factors was performed.

Results

During the study period, there were 2,009 incident reports filed and 1,071,809 imaging studies performed for an incident report rate of 0.19%. The differences in rates by modality were statistically significant (P=0.0001). There was a greater rate of incident reports in interventional radiology (1.54%) (P=0.0001) and in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (0.62%) (P=0.001) as compared to other imaging modalities. There was a higher incident report rate for inpatients (0.34%) as compared to outpatient (0.1%) or emergency center (0.14%) (P=0.0001). There was a higher rate of incident reports for patients under sedation (1.27%) as compared to non-sedated (0.12%) (P=0.0001).

Conclusion

Using incident report rates as a proxy for potential patient harm, the areas of our pediatric radiology service that are associated with the greatest potential for issues are interventional radiology, sedated patients, and inpatients. The areas associated with the least risk are ultrasound (US) and radiography. Safety improvement efforts should be focused on the high-risk areas.

The Joint Commission. Sentinel Event Policy for Hospitals [Internet]. Available from: https://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/6/CAMH_SE_0717.pdf. Accessed 2 April 2018

Hannaford N, Mandel C, Crock C et al (2013) Learning from incident reports in the Australian medical imaging setting: handover and communication errors. Br J Radiol 86:20120336CrossRef

Stewart MJ, Georgiou A, Hordern A et al (2012) What do radiology incident reports reveal about in-hospital communication processes and the use of health information technology? Stud Health Technol Inform 178:213–218PubMed

Mansouri M, Shaqdan KW, Aran S et al (2015) Safety incident reporting in emergency radiology: analysis of 1717 safety incident reports. Emerg Radiol 22:623–630CrossRef

Mansouri M, Aran S, Harvey HB et al (2016) Rates of safety incident reporting in MRI in a large academic medical center. J Magn Reson Imaging 43:998–1007CrossRef

Mansouri M, Aran S, Shaqdan KW, Abujudeh HH (2016) Rating and classification of incident reporting in radiology in a large academic medical center. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 45:247–252CrossRef

Schultz SR, Watson RE Jr, Prescott SL et al (2011) Patient safety event reporting in a large radiology department. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:684–688CrossRef

Jaimes C, Murcia DJ, Miguel K et al (2018) Identification of quality improvement areas in pediatric MRI from analysis of patient safety reports. Pediatr Radiol 48:66–73CrossRef

Steering Committee on Quality Improvement and Management and Committee on Hospital Care (2011) Policy statement -- principles of pediatric patient pafety: reducing harm due to medical care. Pediatrics 127:1199–1210CrossRef

10.

Donnelly LF, Dorfman SR, Jones J, Bisset GS 3^rd (2017) Transition from peer review to peer learning: experience in a radiology department. J Am Coll Radiol 15:1143–1149CrossRef

11.

Malviya S, Voepel-Lewis T, Eldevik OP et al (2000) Sedation and general anaesthesia in children undergoing MRI and CT: adverse events and outcomes. Br J Anaesth 84:743–748CrossRef

12.

Dalal PG, Murray D, Cox T et al (2006) Sedation and anesthesia protocols used for magnetic resonance imaging studies in infants: provider and pharmacologic considerations. Anesth Analg 103:863–868CrossRef

13.

Schulte-Uentrop L, Goepfert MS (2010) Anaesthesia or sedation for MRI in children. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 23:513–517CrossRef

14.

Kang R, Shin YH, Gil N-S et al (2017) A comparison of the use of propofol alone and propofol with midazolam for pediatric magnetic resonance imaging sedation - a retrospective cohort study. BMC Anesthesiol 17:138CrossRef

15.

Boriosi JP, Eickhoff JC, Klein KB, Hollman GA (2017) A retrospective comparison of propofol alone to propofol in combination with dexmedetomidine for pediatric 3T MRI sedation. Paediatr Anaesth 27:52–59CrossRef

16.

Vanderby SA, Babyn PS, Carter MW et al (2010) Effect of anesthesia and sedation on pediatric MR imaging patient flow. Radiology 256:229–237CrossRef

17.

Olisemeke B, Chen YF, Hemming K, Girling A (2014) The effectiveness of service delivery initiatives at improving patients’ waiting times in clinical radiology departments: a systematic review. J Digit Imaging 27:751–778CrossRef

18.

Dako F, Cobb R, Verdi S et al (2018) Use of value stream mapping to reduce outpatient CT scan wait times. J Am Coll Radiol 15:82–85CrossRef

19.

White BA, Yun BJ, Lev MH, Raja AS (2017) Applying systems engineering reduces radiology transport cycle times in the emergency department. West J Emerg Med 18:410–418CrossRef

20.

Owens A (2016) Interventional radiology patient throughput QI project. J Radiol Nurs 35:153CrossRef

21.

Marquez LO, Stewart H (2005) Improving medical imaging report turnaround times: the role of technology. Radiol Manage 27:26–31PubMed

22.

Halsted MJ, Froehle CM (2008) Design, implementation, and assessment of a radiology workflow management system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:321–327CrossRef

23.

Starmer AJ, Spector ND, Srivastava R et al (2014) Changes in medical errors after implementation of a handoff program. N Engl J Med 371:1803–1812CrossRef

24.

Sutcliffe KM, Lewton E, Rosenthal MM (2004) Communication failures: an insidious contributor to medical mishaps. Acad Med 79:186–194CrossRef

25.

Rees P, Edwards A, Powell C et al (2017) Patient safety incidents involving sick children in primary Care in England and Wales: a mixed methods analysis. PLoS Med 14:e1002217CrossRef

26.

Siewert B, Brook OR, Hochman M, Eisenberg RL (2016) Impact of communication errors in radiology on patient care, customer satisfaction, and work-flow efficiency. AJR Am J Roentgenol 206:573–579CrossRef

27.

Jones DN, Thomas MJ, Mandel CJ et al (2010) Where failures occur in the imaging care cycle: lessons from the radiology events register. J Am Coll Radiol 7:593–602CrossRef

28.

Paquette V, McGloin R, Northway T et al (2011) Describing intravenous extravasation in children (DIVE study). Can J Hosp Pharm 64:340–345PubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Bellin M-F, Jakobsen JA, Tomassin I et al (2002) Contrast medium extravasation injury: guidelines for prevention and management. Eur Radiol 12:2807–2812CrossRef

30.

Amaral JG, Traubici J, BenDavid G et al (2006) Safety of power injector use in children as measured by incidence of extravasation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:580–583CrossRef

31.

Gulani V, Calamante F, Shellock FG et al (2017) Gadolinium deposition in the brain: summary of evidence and recommendations. Lancet Neurol 16:564–570CrossRef

32.

McDonald RJ, McDonald JS, Kallmes DF et al (2015) Intracranial gadolinium deposition after contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 275:772–782CrossRef

33.

de Feijter JM, de Grave WS, Muijtjens AM et al (2012) A comprehensive overview of medical error in hospitals using incident-reporting systems, patient complaints and chart review of inpatient deaths. PLoS One 7:e31125CrossRef

34.

Nuckols TK, Bell DS, Liu H et al (2007) Rates and types of events reported to established incident reporting systems in two US hospitals. Qual Saf Health Care 16:164–168CrossRef

Title: Gauging potential risk for patients in pediatric radiology by review of over 2,000 incident reports
Authors: Elizabeth J. Snyder
Wei Zhang
Kimberly Chua Jasmin
Sam Thankachan
Lane F. Donnelly
Publication date: 01-12-2018
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Pediatric Radiology / Issue 13/2018
Print ISSN: 0301-0449
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1998
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-018-4238-1

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Gauging potential risk for patients in pediatric radiology by review of over 2,000 incident reports

Abstract

Background

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 13/2018

Superiority vs. equivalence/non-inferiority: study design and meeting abstracts

Radiologic evaluation of pulmonary injury following carmustine- and cyclophosphamide-based preparative regimen for autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in children

Active reviewers (from October 1, 2017 through September 30, 2018)

Maturation of pelvic ossification centers on computed tomography in normal children

Current concepts in radiologic assessment of pediatric brain tumors during treatment, part 1

Differential diagnosis of posterior fossa tumours in children: new insights