International Journal for Quality in Health Care 12:371-378 (2000)
© 2000 International Society for Quality in Health Care
A comparison of iatrogenic injury studies in Australia and the USA I: context, methods, casemix, population, patient and hospital characteristics
1 Division of General Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School
2 Department of Health Care Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
3 Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, University of Adelaide and Royal Adelaide Hospital
4 Australian Patient Safety Foundation, Adelaide, SA
5 Royal North Shore Hospital, North Sydney, NSW
6 University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
Objective. To better understand the differences between two iatrogenic injury studies of hospitalized patients in 1992 which used ostensibly similar methods and similar sample sizes, but had quite different findings. The Quality in Australian Health Care Study (QAHCS) reported that 16.6% of admissions were associated with adverse events (AE), whereas the Utah, Colorado Study (UTCOS) reported a rate of 2.9%. Setting. Hospitalized patients in Australia and the USA. Design. Investigators from both studies compared methods and characteristics and identified differences. QAHCS data were then analysed using UTCOS methods. Main outcome measures. Differences between the studies and the comparative AE rates when these had been accounted for. Results. Both studies used a two-stage chart review process (screening nurse review followed by confirmatory physician review) to detect AEs; five important methodological differences were found: (i) QAHCS nurse reviewers referred records that documented any link to a previous admission, whereas UTCOS imposed age-related time constraints; (ii) QAHCS used a lower confidence threshold for defining medical causation; (iii) QAHCS used two physician reviewers, whereas UTCOS used one; (iv) QAHCS counted all AEs associated with an index admission whereas UTCOS counted only those determining the annual incidence; and (v) QAHCS included some types of events not included in UTCOS. When the QAHCS data were analysed using UTCOS methods, the comparative rates became 10.6% and 3.2%, respectively. Conclusions. Five methodological differences accounted for some of the discrepancy between the two studies. Two explanations for the remaining three-fold disparity are that quality of care was worse in Australia and that medical record content and/or reviewer behaviour was different.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. S. Weissman, E. C. Schneider, S. N. Weingart, A. M. Epstein, J. David-Kasdan, S. Feibelmann, C. L. Annas, N. Ridley, L. Kirle, and C. Gatsonis Comparing Patient-Reported Hospital Adverse Events with Medical Record Review: Do Patients Know Something That Hospitals Do Not? Ann Intern Med, July 15, 2008; 149(2): 100 - 108. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E N de Vries, M A Ramrattan, S M Smorenburg, D J Gouma, and M A Boermeester The incidence and nature of in-hospital adverse events: a systematic review Qual. Saf. Health Care, June 1, 2008; 17(3): 216 - 223. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Braithwaite, M. Westbrook, and J. Travaglia Attitudes toward the large-scale implementation of an incident reporting system Int. J. Qual. Health Care, June 1, 2008; 20(3): 184 - 191. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. J. Marang-van de Mheen, E.-J. F. Hollander, and J. Kievit Effects of study methodology on adverse outcome occurrence and mortality Int. J. Qual. Health Care, December 1, 2007; 19(6): 399 - 406. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Michel, J. L. Quenon, A. Djihoud, S. Tricaud-Vialle, and A. M. de Sarasqueta French national survey of inpatient adverse events prospectively assessed with ward staff Qual. Saf. Health Care, October 1, 2007; 16(5): 369 - 377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W B Runciman, J A H Williamson, A Deakin, K A Benveniste, K Bannon, and P D Hibbert An integrated framework for safety, quality and risk management: an information and incident management system based on a universal patient safety classification Qual. Saf. Health Care, December 1, 2006; 15(suppl_1): i82 - i90. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. E. Guse, H. Yang, and P. M. Layde Identifying risk factors for medical injury. Int. J. Qual. Health Care, June 1, 2006; 18(3): 203 - 210. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Pittet and L. Donaldson Challenging the world: patient safety and health care-associated infection Int. J. Qual. Health Care, February 1, 2006; 18(1): 4 - 8. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Braithwaite Hunter-gatherer human nature and health system safety: an evolutionary cleft stick? Int. J. Qual. Health Care, December 1, 2005; 17(6): 541 - 545. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. J. Forster, K. G. Shojania, and C. van Walraven Improving patient safety: moving beyond the "hype" of medical errors Can. Med. Assoc. J., October 11, 2005; 173(8): 893 - 894. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. Baker Reconsidering the Harvard Medical Practice Study Conclusions about the Validity of Medical Malpractice Claims J. Law Med. Ethics, September 1, 2005; 33(3): 501 - 514. [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. C. McBride, V. W. Chiang, D. A. Goldmann, and C. P. Landrigan Preventable Adverse Events in Infants Hospitalized With Bronchiolitis Pediatrics, September 1, 2005; 116(3): 603 - 608. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. H. Woolf, A. J. Kuzel, S. M. Dovey, and R. L. Phillips Jr A String of Mistakes: The Importance of Cascade Analysis in Describing, Counting, and Preventing Medical Errors Ann. Fam. Med, July 1, 2004; 2(4): 317 - 326. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. R. Baker, P. G. Norton, V. Flintoft, R. Blais, A. Brown, J. Cox, E. Etchells, W. A. Ghali, P. Hebert, S. R. Majumdar, et al. The Canadian Adverse Events Study: the incidence of adverse events among hospital patients in Canada Can. Med. Assoc. J., May 25, 2004; 170(11): 1678 - 1686. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. J. Forster, T. R. Asmis, H. D. Clark, G. Al Saied, C. C. Code, S. C. Caughey, K. Baker, J. Watters, J. Worthington, and C. van Walraven Ottawa Hospital Patient Safety Study: incidence and timing of adverse events in patients admitted to a Canadian teaching hospital Can. Med. Assoc. J., April 13, 2004; 170(8): 1235 - 1240. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G R Baker HARVARD MEDICAL PRACTICE STUDY Qual. Saf. Health Care, April 1, 2004; 13(2): 151 - 152. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. A. Hosford, E. H. Lai, J. H. Riley, C.-F. Xu, T. M. Danoff, and A. D. Roses Pharmacogenetics to Predict Drug-Related Adverse Events Toxicol Pathol, January 1, 2004; 32(1_suppl): 9 - 12. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. B. Runciman, E. E. Roughead, S. J. Semple, and R. J. Adams Adverse drug events and medication errors in Australia Int. J. Qual. Health Care, December 1, 2003; 15(90001): i49 - 59. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G Neale and M Woloshynowych Retrospective case record review: a blunt instrument that needs sharpening Qual. Saf. Health Care, February 1, 2003; 12(1): 2 - 3. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. K. KABLE, R. W. GIBBERD, and A. D. SPIGELMAN Adverse events in surgical patients in Australia Int. J. Qual. Health Care, August 1, 2002; 14(4): 269 - 276. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|