Display options
Cite
von Plessen C, Kodal AM, Anhøj J. Experiences with global trigger tool reviews in five Danish hospitals: an implementation study. BMJ Open. 2012;2(5)doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001324.
von Plessen, C., Kodal, A. M., & Anhøj, J. (2012). Experiences with global trigger tool reviews in five Danish hospitals: an implementation study. BMJ open, 2(5), . https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001324
von Plessen, Christian, et al. "Experiences with global trigger tool reviews in five Danish hospitals: an implementation study." BMJ open vol. 2,5 (2012). doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001324
von Plessen C, Kodal AM, Anhøj J. Experiences with global trigger tool reviews in five Danish hospitals: an implementation study. BMJ Open. 2012 Oct 12;2(5). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001324. Print 2012. PMID: 23065451; PMCID: PMC3488702.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

BMJ Open. 2012 Oct 12;2(5). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001324. Print 2012.

Experiences with global trigger tool reviews in five Danish hospitals: an implementation study.

BMJ open

Christian von Plessen, Anne Marie Kodal, Jacob Anhøj

Affiliations

  1. Department of Pulmonary Medicine and Infectious diseases, Hilleroed Hospital, Hilleroed, Denmark.

PMID: 23065451 PMCID: PMC3488702 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001324

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To describe experiences with the implementation of global trigger tool (GTT) reviews in five Danish hospitals and to suggest ways to improve the performance of GTT review teams.

DESIGN: Retrospective observational study.

SETTING: The measurement and monitoring of harms are crucial to campaigns to improve the safety of patients. Increasingly, teams use the GTT to review patient records and measure harms in English and non-English-speaking countries. Meanwhile, it is not clear as to how the method performs in such diverse settings.

PARTICIPANTS: Review teams from five Danish pilot hospitals of the national Danish Safer Hospital Programme.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We collected harm rates, background and anecdotal information and reported patient safety incidents (PSIs) from five pilot hospitals currently participating in the Danish Safer Hospital Programme. Experienced reviewers categorised harms by type. We plotted harm rates as run-charts and applied rules for the detection of patterns of non-random variation.

RESULTS: The hospitals differed in size but had similar patient populations and activity. PSIs varied between 3 and 12 per 1000 patient-days. The average harm rate for all hospitals was 60 per 1000 patient-days ranging from 34 to 84. The percentage of harmed patients was 25 and ranged from 18 to 33. Overall, 96% of harms were temporary. Infections, pressure ulcers procedure-related and gastrointestinal problems were common. Teams reported differences in training and review procedures such as the role of the secondary reviewer.

CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial variation in harm rates. Differences in training, review procedures and documentation in patient records probably contributed to these variations. Training reviewers as teams, specifying the roles of the different reviewers, training records and a database for findings of reviews may improve the application of the GTT.

References

  1. N Engl J Med. 2006 Dec 28;355(26):2725-32 - PubMed
  2. Pediatrics. 2006 Oct;118(4):1332-40 - PubMed
  3. N Engl J Med. 2010 Nov 25;363(22):2124-34 - PubMed
  4. N Engl J Med. 2007 Aug 9;357(6):608-13 - PubMed
  5. BMJ. 2007 Jan 13;334(7584):79 - PubMed
  6. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2007 Mar;8(2):145-52 - PubMed
  7. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2006 Oct;32(10):585-90 - PubMed
  8. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008 Aug;17(4):253-8 - PubMed
  9. Ann Intern Med. 2002 Jun 4;136(11):812-6 - PubMed
  10. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008 Jun;17(3):216-23 - PubMed
  11. Int J Qual Health Care. 2010 Aug;22(4):266-74 - PubMed
  12. BMJ. 2006 Jun 3;332(7553):1328-30 - PubMed
  13. Int J Qual Health Care. 2009 Aug;21(4):301-7 - PubMed
  14. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011 Apr;30(4):581-9 - PubMed
  15. BMJ. 2011 Feb 03;342:d195 - PubMed
  16. BMJ. 2008 Nov 13;337:a2426 - PubMed
  17. BMJ. 2011 Feb 03;342:d199 - PubMed
  18. JAMA. 2006 Jan 18;295(3):324-7 - PubMed
  19. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011 Jan;20(1):46-51 - PubMed

Publication Types