Abstract
Objectives: To redesign the existing clinical review form (RF2) used in previous retrospective case record review studies in order to clarify the review process and provide a more powerful analysis of adverse events; and then to ask clinicians to pilot and evaluate the new modular review form (MRF2). The review form is divided into five sections, each with a defined purpose, providing a modular structure.
Design: Design and testing of the MRF2 on a sample of medical and nursing records, and evaluation of the reviewers' responses regarding the new review form.
Setting: Hospital based teams from eight countries.
Results: The modular review form was reported to be comprehensive, well structured, and clear. Most of the reviewers agreed with the positive statements regarding the review form. Overall, the modular structure was thought to be helpful. Several modifications have been made to the final version to take account of criticisms and suggestions.
Conclusions: The full potential of case record review has yet to be explored. The benefits of this review form include a modular format which enables reviewers or project leaders to select the focus of their review based on resources and the purpose of the review, and to identify contributory factors which indicate areas for improvement and prevention. The training of reviewers is of vital importance for record review. Record review remains one of the primary methods for assessing the incidence of adverse events and the new format is suitable for both prospective and retrospective review.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (184.3 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Brennan T. A., Leape L. L., Laird N. M., Hebert L., Localio A. R., Lawthers A. G., Newhouse J. P., Weiler P. C., Hiatt H. H. Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients. Results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I. N Engl J Med. 1991 Feb 7;324(6):370–376. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199102073240604. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Davis P., Lay-Yee R., Schug S., Briant R., Scott A., Johnson S., Bingley W. Adverse events regional feasibility study: indicative findings. N Z Med J. 2001 May 11;114(1131):203–205. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mills D. H. Medical insurance feasibility study. A technical summary. West J Med. 1978 Apr;128(4):360–365. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Neale G., Woloshynowych M. Retrospective case record review: a blunt instrument that needs sharpening. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Feb;12(1):2–3. doi: 10.1136/qhc.12.1.2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Neale G., Woloshynowych M., Vincent C. Exploring the causes of adverse events in NHS hospital practice. J R Soc Med. 2001 Jul;94(7):322–330. doi: 10.1177/014107680109400702. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Schiøler T., Lipczak H., Pedersen B. L., Mogensen T. S., Bech K. B., Stockmarr A., Svenning A. R., Frølich A., Danish Adverse Event Study Forekomsten af utilsigtede haendelser på sygehuse. En retrospektiv gennemgang af journaler. Ugeskr Laeger. 2001 Sep 24;163(39):5370–5378. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Stanhope N., Crowley-Murphy M., Vincent C., O'Connor A. M., Taylor-Adams S. E. An evaluation of adverse incident reporting. J Eval Clin Pract. 1999 Feb;5(1):5–12. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2753.1999.00146.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Thomas E. J., Studdert D. M., Burstin H. R., Orav E. J., Zeena T., Williams E. J., Howard K. M., Weiler P. C., Brennan T. A. Incidence and types of adverse events and negligent care in Utah and Colorado. Med Care. 2000 Mar;38(3):261–271. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200003000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Thomas Eric J., Petersen Laura A. Measuring errors and adverse events in health care. J Gen Intern Med. 2003 Jan;18(1):61–67. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20147.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vincent C., Neale G., Woloshynowych M. Adverse events in British hospitals: preliminary retrospective record review. BMJ. 2001 Mar 3;322(7285):517–519. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7285.517. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vincent C. Risk, safety, and the dark side of quality. BMJ. 1997 Jun 21;314(7097):1775–1776. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7097.1775. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vincent C., Taylor-Adams S., Chapman E. J., Hewett D., Prior S., Strange P., Tizzard A. How to investigate and analyse clinical incidents: clinical risk unit and association of litigation and risk management protocol. BMJ. 2000 Mar 18;320(7237):777–781. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7237.777. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vincent C., Taylor-Adams S., Stanhope N. Framework for analysing risk and safety in clinical medicine. BMJ. 1998 Apr 11;316(7138):1154–1157. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7138.1154. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wilson R. M., Runciman W. B., Gibberd R. W., Harrison B. T., Newby L., Hamilton J. D. The Quality in Australian Health Care Study. Med J Aust. 1995 Nov 6;163(9):458–471. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1995.tb124691.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.