These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Selected medical errors in the intensive care unit: results of the IATROREF study: parts I and II.
    Author: Garrouste-Orgeas M, Timsit JF, Vesin A, Schwebel C, Arnodo P, Lefrant JY, Souweine B, Tabah A, Charpentier J, Gontier O, Fieux F, Mourvillier B, Troché G, Reignier J, Dumay MF, Azoulay E, Reignier B, Carlet J, Soufir L, OUTCOMEREA Study Group.
    Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med; 2010 Jan 15; 181(2):134-42. PubMed ID: 19875690.
    Abstract:
    RATIONALE: Although intensive care units (ICUs) were created for patients with life-threatening illnesses, the ICU environment generates a high risk of iatrogenic events. Identifying medical errors (MEs) that serve as indicators for iatrogenic risk is crucial for purposes of reporting and prevention. OBJECTIVES: We describe the selection of indicator MEs, the incidence of such MEs, and their relationship with mortality. METHODS: We selected indicator MEs using Delphi techniques. An observational prospective multicenter cohort study of these MEs was conducted from March 27 to April 3, 2006, in 70 ICUs; 16 (23%) centers were audited. Harm from MEs was collected using specific scales. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Fourteen types of MEs were selected as indicators; 1,192 MEs were reported for 1,369 patients, and 367 (26.8%) patients experienced at least 1 ME (2.1/1,000 patient-days). The most common MEs were insulin administration errors (185.9/1,000 d of insulin treatment). Of the 1,192 medical errors, 183 (15.4%) in 128 (9.3%) patients were adverse events that were followed by one or more clinical consequences (n = 163) or that required one or more procedures or treatments (n = 58). By multivariable analysis, having two or more adverse events was an independent risk factor for ICU mortality (odds ratio, 3.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-7.36; P = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: The impact of medical errors on mortality indicates an urgent need to develop prevention programs. We have planned a study to assess a program based on our results.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]