National Reporting And Learning System Research Articles

Patient safety incidents in endoscopy: a human factors analysis of nonprocedural significant harm incidents from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS).

Despite advances in understanding and reducing the risk of endoscopic procedures, there is little consideration of the safety of the wider endoscopy service. Patient safety incidents (PSIs) still occur. We sought to identify nonprocedural PSIs (nPSIs) and their causative factors from a human factors perspective and generate ideas for safety improvement. Endoscopy-specific PSI reports were extracted from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS). A retrospective, cross-sectional human factors analysis of data was performed. Two independent researchers coded data using a hybrid thematic analysis approach. The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) was used to code contributory factors. Analysis informed creation of driver diagrams and key recommendations for safety improvement in endoscopy. From 2017 to 2019, 1181 endoscopy-specific PSIs of significant harm were reported across England and Wales, with 539 (45.6%) being nPSIs. Five categories accounted for over 80% of all incidents, with "follow-up and surveillance" being the largest (23.4% of all nPSIs). From the free-text incident reports, 487 human factors codes were identified. Decision-based errors were the most common act prior to PSI occurrence. Other frequent preconditions to incidents were focused on environmental factors, particularly overwhelmed resources, patient factors, and ineffective team communication. Lack of staffing, standard operating procedures, effective systems, and clinical pathways were also contributory. Seven key recommendations for improving safety have been made in response to our findings. This was the first national-level human factors analysis of endoscopy-specific PSIs. This work will inform safety improvement strategies and should empower individual services to review their approach to safety.

Contributory factors and patient harm including deaths associated direct acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) medication incidents: evaluation of real world data reported to the National Reporting and Learning System

ABSTRACT Introduction Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are considered high risk medicines and are frequently associated with medication errors. The nature of incidents and associated outcomes of such incidents are poorly understood. Areas covered Using a national patient safety reporting database, the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS), this study aimed to report the contributory factors and outcomes including severe harm and deaths related to all safety incidents involving DOACs reported in England and Wales between 2017–2019. Reason’s accident causation model was used to classify the incidents. Expert opinion A total of 15,730 incident reports were analyzed. A total of 25 deaths were reported with a further 270 and 55 incidents leading to moderate and severe harm, respectively. A further 8.8% (n = 1381) of incidents were associated with low degree of harm. The majority of the incidents involved active failures (n = 13776; 87.58) including duplication of anticoagulant therapies, patients being discharged without DOACs, non-consideration of renal function, and lack of commencement of DOACs post-surgery suggesting preventability of such reported incidents. This study shows that medication incidents involving DOACs have the potential to cause severe harm and deaths, and there is a need to promote guideline adherence through education, training, and decision support technologies.

Defining avoidable healthcare-associated harm in prisons: A mixed-method development study.

Reducing avoidable healthcare-associated harm is a global health priority. Progress in evaluating the burden and aetiology of avoidable harm in prisons is limited compared with other healthcare sectors. To address this gap, this study aimed to develop a definition of avoidable harm to facilitate future epidemiological studies in prisons. Using a sequential mixed methods study design we first characterised and reached consensus on the types and avoidability of patient harm in prison healthcare involving analysis of 151 serious prison incidents reported to the Strategic Executive Information System (StEIS) followed by in-depth nominal group (NG) discussions with four former service users and four prison professionals. Findings of the NG discussions and StEIS analysis were then synthesised and discussed among the research team and study oversight groups to develop an operational definition of avoidable harm in prison healthcare which was subsequently tested and validated using prison patient safety incident report data derived from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS). Analysis of StEIS incident reports and NG discussions identified important factors influencing avoidable harm which reflected the unique prison setting, including health care delivery issues and constraints associated with the secure environment which limited access to care. These findings informed the development of a new working two-tier definition of avoidable harm using appropriate and timely intervention, which included an additional assessment of harm avoidability taking into the account the prison regime and environment. The definition was compatible with the NRLS incident report narratives and illustrated how the prison environment may influence identification of avoidable harm and judgements of avoidability. We have developed a working definition of avoidable harm in prison health care that enables consideration of caveats associated with prison environments and systems. Our definition enables future studies of the safety of prison healthcare to standardise outcome measurement.

Analysis of the nature and contributory factors of medication safety incidents following hospital discharge using National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) data from England and Wales: a multi-method study.

Improving medication safety during transition of care is an international healthcare priority. While existing research reveals that medication-related incidents and associated harms may be common following hospital discharge, there is limited information about their nature and contributory factors at a national level which is crucial to inform improvement strategy. To characterise the nature and contributory factors of medication-related incidents during transition of care from secondary to primary care. A retrospective analysis of medication incidents reported to the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) in England and Wales between 2015 and 2019. Descriptive analysis identified the frequency and nature of incidents and content analysis of free text data, coded using the Patient Safety Research Group (PISA) classification, examined the contributory factors and outcome of incidents. A total of 1121 medication-related incident reports underwent analysis. Most incidents involved patients over 65 years old (55%, n = 626/1121). More than one in 10 (12.6%, n = 142/1121) incidents were associated with patient harm. The drug monitoring (17%) and administration stages (15%) were associated with a higher proportion of harmful incidents than any other drug use stages. Common medication classes associated with incidents were the cardiovascular (n = 734) and central nervous (n = 273) systems. Among 408 incidents reporting 467 contributory factors, the most common contributory factors were organisation factors (82%, n = 383/467) (mostly related to continuity of care which is the delivery of a seamless service through integration, co-ordination, and the sharing of information between different providers), followed by staff factors (16%, n = 75/467). Medication incidents after hospital discharge are associated with patient harm. Several targets were identified for future research that could support the development of remedial interventions, including commonly observed medication classes, older adults, increase patient engagement, and improve shared care agreement for medication monitoring post hospital discharge. Study using reports about unsafe or substandard care mainly written by healthcare professionals to better understand the type and causes of medication safety problems following hospital discharge Why was the study done? The safe use of medicines after hospital discharge has been highlighted by the World Health Organization as an important target for improvement in patient care. Yet, the type of medication problems which occur, and their causes are poorly understood across England and Wales, which may hamper our efforts to create ways to improve care as they may not be based on what we know causes the problem in the first place.What did the researchers do? The research team studied medication safety incident reports collected across England and Wales over a 5-year period to better understand what kind of medication safety problems occur after hospital discharge and why they happen, so we can find ways to prevent them from happening in future.What did the researchers find? The total number of incident reports studied was 1121, and the majority (n = 626) involved older people. More than one in ten of these incidents caused harm to patients. The most common medications involved in the medication safety incidents were for cardiovascular diseases such as high blood pressure, conditions such as mental illness, pain and neurological conditions (e.g., epilepsy) and other illnesses such as diabetes. The most common causes of these incidents were because of the organisation rules, such as information sharing, followed by staff issues, such as not following protocols, individual mistakes and not having the right skills for the task.What do the findings mean? This study has identified some important targets that can be a focus of future efforts to improve the safe use of medicines after hospital discharge. These include concentrating attention on medication for the cardiovascular and central nervous systems (e.g., via incorporating them in prescribing safety indicators and pharmaceutical prioritisation tools), staff skill mix (e.g., embedding clinical pharmacist roles at key parts of the care pathway where greatest risk is suspected), and implementation of electronic interventions to improve timely communication of medication and other information between healthcare providers.

1048 REDUCING RISK FROM WARFARIN- A COMPLETED AUDIT CYCLE ON NICE COMPLIANCE WITH WARFARIN FOR NVAF IN HOSPITALISED OLDER PEOPLE

Abstract Introduction Traditionally Warfarin has been mainly used for stroke thromboprophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation but direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) are increasingly being used as they have improved safety profiles with comparable efficacy. Recent data from National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) have discovered safety incidents related to anticoagulation, predominantly Warfarin, contributing in excess of 10% of all medication errors. National institute for clinical excellence (NICE) recommends reassessing anticoagulation choice for patients on Warfarin with poor anticoagulation control, indicated by any of the following: 1 > 2 INR values <1.5 or > 5 or 1 INR value >8, within the past 6 months 2 > Time in therapeutic range (TTR) <65% Intervention An initial retrospective audit on 50 patients on Warfarin for NVAF performed between June—September 18 showed poor compliance with NICE. We reviewed the previous 6 months INR values and recorded any significant deviations outside of the therapeutic range as per NICE. TTR over the last 6 months was calculated using the Rosendaal method. Following departmental audit presentation, a reaudit was carried out between Jan-Aug 2019 to assess improvement. Results Median age was 87.5 compared to 83 in the first audit. Warfarin was correctly continued in 7/38(18%) in the 1st audit which improved to 9/28 (32%) in the second. Number of patients discharged on warfarin with unstable INRs decreased significantly from 26/32 (81%) patients in the 1st audit to 10/24 (42%) in the 2nd. Discussion Our reaudit shows significant reduction in continuation of warfarin on discharge in patients with unstable INRs (p = 0.0043 Fisher exact test). Although, there is a trend towards improvement with NICE compliance; in general, the compliance with NICE remains poor. We suggest geriatricians to proactively review the appropriateness of warfarin prescription and to consider a DOAC in preference to Warfarin in all elderly patients.

Learning from diagnostic errors to improve patient safety when GPs work in or alongside emergency departments: incorporating realist methodology into patient safety incident report analysis

BackgroundIncreasing demand on emergency healthcare systems has prompted introduction of new healthcare service models including the provision of GP services in or alongside emergency departments. In England this led to a policy proposal and £100million (US$130million) of funding for all emergency departments to have co-located GP services. However, there is a lack of evidence for whether such service models are effective and safe. We examined diagnostic errors reported in patient safety incident reports to develop theories to explain how and why they occurred to inform potential priority areas for improvement and inform qualitative data collection at case study sites to further refine the theories.MethodsWe used a mixed-methods design using exploratory descriptive analysis to identify the most frequent and harmful sources of diagnostic error and thematic analysis, incorporating realist methodology to refine theories from an earlier rapid realist review, to describe how and why the events occurred and could be mitigated, to inform improvement recommendations. We used two UK data sources: Coroners’ reports to prevent future deaths (30.7.13–14.08.18) and National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) patient safety incident reports (03.01.05–30.11.15).ResultsNine Coroners’ reports (from 1347 community and hospital reports, 2013–2018) and 217 NRLS reports (from 13 million, 2005–2015) were identified describing diagnostic error related to GP services in or alongside emergency departments. Initial theories to describe potential priority areas for improvement included: difficulty identifying appropriate patients for the GP service; under-investigation and misinterpretation of diagnostic tests; and inadequate communication and referral pathways between the emergency and GP services. High-risk presentations included: musculoskeletal injury, chest pain, headache, calf pain and sick children.ConclusionInitial theories include the following topics as potential priority areas for improvement interventions and evaluation to minimise the risk of diagnostic errors when GPs work in or alongside emergency departments: a standardised initial assessment with streaming guidance based on local service provision; clinical decision support for high-risk conditions; and standardised computer systems, communication and referral pathways between emergency and GP services. These theories require refinement and testing with qualitative data collection from case study (hospital) sites.

EP.WE.135Analysis of National Bariatric Surgery Related Clinical Incidents

Abstract Background Hundreds of thousands of patient-safety clinical incidents are reported to the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) database in the United Kingdom (UK) every year. The purpose of this study was to identify bariatric surgery-related learning points from these incidents. Methods We analysed bariatric surgery-related clinical incidents reported to the UK NRLS database between 01 April 2005 and 31st October 2020. Results We identified 541 bariatric surgery-related clinical incidents in 58 different themes. Preoperative incidents represented 30.31% (N = 164), intraoperative 38.09% (N = 206), and postoperative accounted for 31.61% (N = 171). In terms of severity of incidents, (150;27.7%) were of high severity, whereas medium and low severity incidents were (244;45.1%) and (147;27.2%) respectively. The most common high severity theme was failure of thromboprophylaxis (50;9.2%). Intraoperative high severity incidents included 17 incidents of stapling of orogastric/nasogastric tubes or temperature probes, 8 missed needles, 8 broken graspers, and 6 incidents of band parts left behind. Postoperatively, the most common high severity theme was improper management of diabetes mellitus (DM) (35;6.5%). Medications errors represented a significant proportion of the medium severity incidents and included (26;4.8%) incidents of improper or missed prescription of routine medications and anticoagulants preoperatively and (45;8.3%) wrong prescriptions, dosage or prescribing of contraindicated medications postoperatively. Among the low severity themes identified there were (23;4.3%) incidents of postoperative diet problems, and (19;3.5%) patients listed for wrong procedures. Conclusion We identified 58 specific themes of bariatric surgery-related clinical incidents. Awareness of these themes should help to improve the safety of bariatric surgery worldwide.

SP5.1.3 Analysis of National Bariatric Surgery Related Clinical Incidents: Lessons Learned and a Proposed Safety Checklist for Bariatric Surgery

Abstract Background Hundreds of thousands of patient-safety clinical incidents are reported to the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) database in the UK every year. The purpose of this study was to identify bariatric surgery-related learning points from these incidents. Methods We analyzed bariatric surgery-related clinical incidents reported to the UK NRLS database between 01 April 2005 and 31st October 2020. The authors used their experience to identify learning themes and design a safety checklist. Results We identified 541 bariatric surgery-related clinical incidents in 58 different themes. Preoperative incidents represented 30.3% (N = 164), intraoperative 38.1% (N = 206), and postoperative accounted for 31.6% (N = 171). In terms of severity of incidents, (150;27.7%) were of high severity, whereas medium and low severity incidents were (244;45.1%) and (147;27.2%) respectively. The most commonly reported high severity theme was failure of thromboprophylaxis (50;9.2%). Intraoperative high severity incidents included 17 incidents of stapling of orogastric/nasogastric tubes or temperature probes, 8 missed needles, 8 broken graspers, and 6 incidents of band parts left behind. Postoperatively, the most commonly reported high severity theme was improper management of diabetes mellitus (35;6.5%). Medications errors represented a significant proportion of the medium severity incidents and included (26;4.8%) incidents of improper or missed prescription of routine medications and anticoagulants preoperatively and (45;8.3%) wrong prescriptions, dosage or prescribing of contraindicated medications postoperatively. Conclusion We identified 58 specific themes of bariatric surgery-related clinical incidents. We proposed specific recommendations for each incidents theme in addition to a bariatric safety checklist to help improve the safety of bariatric surgery worldwide.

Medical device error and failure reporting: Learning from the car industry

Background Improving the design of technology relies in part, on the reporting of performance failures in existing devices. Healthcare has low levels of formal reporting of performance and failure of medical equipment. This paper examines methods of reporting in the car industry and healthcare and aims to understand differences and identify opportunities for improvement within healthcare. Methods A literature search was carried out in Pubmed, Medline, Embase, Engineering Village, Scopus. NHS England and MHRA publications and guidelines were also reviewed. Focus was placed on the current system of reporting in both industries, known degree of patient harm, initiating factors, barriers, quality and methods of incident investigation and their validity. The findings were used to compare error reporting system in the two industries. Results Derivation of healthcare incident data from different sources means the full extent of patient harm is not known. For example, in 2012 there were 13,549 and 38,395 incidents reported by MHRA and NRLS (National Reporting and Learning System) respectively leading to uncertainties on the extent of the problem. The car industry emphasises the role of reporting source in ensuring data quality. Utilising some aspects of this approach might benefit healthcare reporting. These include a specific reporting system that stresses the importance of organisational learning in improving safety and recognises the limitations of root cause analysis. Conclusions Learning from reporting systems within the car industry may help the healthcare sector improve its own reporting, aiding healthcare performance.

Analysis of National Bariatric Surgery Related Clinical Incidents: Lessons Learned and a Proposed Safety Checklist for Bariatric Surgery.

Hundreds of thousands of patient-safety clinical incidents are reported to the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) database in England and Wales every year. The purpose of this study was to identify bariatric surgery-related learning points from these incidents. We analysed bariatric surgery-related clinical incidents reported to the NRLS database between 01 April 2005 and 31st October 2020. The authors used their experience to identify learning themes, attribute severity, and design a safety checklist from these reported incidents. We identified 541 bariatric surgery-related clinical incidents in 58 different themes. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative incidents represented 30.3% (N = 164), 38.1% (N = 206), and 31.6% (N = 171) incidents respectively. One hundred fifty (27.7%), 244 (45.1%), and 147 (27.2%) incidents were attributed high, medium, and low severity respectively. The most commonly reported high severity theme was the failure of thromboprophylaxis (50; 9.2%). Intraoperative high severity incidents included 17 incidents of stapling of orogastric/nasogastric tubes or temperature probes, 8 missed needles, 8 broken graspers, and 6 incidents of band parts left behind. Postoperatively, the most commonly reported high severity theme was improper management of diabetes mellitus (DM) (35; 6.5%). Medication errors represented a significant proportion of the medium severity incidents. We identified 58 specific themes of bariatric surgery-related clinical incidents. We propose specific recommendations for the prevention of each theme and a safety checklist to help improve the safety of bariatric surgery worldwide.

Medicines safety in children

National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) The NRLS is a voluntary reporting system for patient safety incidents, defined as any unintended or unexpected incidents that could have or did lead to harm. The number of incidents reported reflects reporting culture, and is not necessarily the actual number of incidents occurring. Download the full PDF version […]

SP5 Tenfold medication errors in children – Welsh paediatric surveillance unit study 2017–9

AimsTo establish the incidence and characteristics of tenfold or greater and a tenth or less medication errors in children <16 years in Wales to help inform patient safety on a population level.MethodPopulation-based incidence study in Wales, UK, from June 2017 - May 2019 (24 months). Cases were reported from paediatricians and hospital pharmacists using the monthly Welsh Paediatric Surveillance Unit (WPSU).Results46 confirmed incidents in 44 children from 63 notifications were identified. Cases came from 8 hospitals in Wales with 29 (63%) from the sole tertiary hospital. Median age was 1.7 (range 1 week to 15) years and weight 10 kg (0.6 to 59).39 (85%) were overdosing (up to 1000x fold error) and 7 underdosing. 40 different medications were involved, 16 (37%) intravenous. Of 29 cases involving enteral medication, 26 (90%) were liquid formulations. Three cases were discharge medication prescribed or dispensed incorrectly and administrated at home. Stage of errors were primarily in prescribing 37 (80%), administration 7 (16%) and dispensing 2 (4%).18 (42%) cases reached the patient, 10 from prescribing. Seven cases were spotted after multiple doses were given. Six errors resulted in harm, three which required intensive care treatment. No deaths or permanent disabilities were reported. Half (23/46) of all errors reported and two-thirds (12/18) of cases that reached the child occurred in <10 kg children.Several human factor themes were identified: Prescribing confusion between gram milligram and microgram (none reached patient, n=7), confusing between mg and mg/kg (n=6 including 3 underdosing errors), leading zero errors (e.g. 0.1 vs 0.001 mg, n=6) and prescribing reconciliation errors where admitting doctor attempted to prescribe chronic medication in mg by reversing calculating liquid dosage expressed in mL (n=4).During this study period 164,000 hospital admissions occurred in children <16 years in Wales. Our data estimates a tenfold error incidence of 1:3600 paediatric admissions, with drug reaching the child in 1:9000 admissions.ConclusionIn this unique first ever population surveillance study, tenfold errors in children occurred at every stage of medication process and in the full range of care settings. Errors found were very different from those obtained from tertiary hospital single centre study and UK National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS). Strategies for error reduction will be more productive if designed across a whole national healthcare system.

A mixed-methods analysis of patient safety incidents involving opioid substitution treatment with methadone or buprenorphine in community-based care in England and Wales.

Opioid substitution treatment is used in many countries as an effective harm minimization strategy. There is a need for more information about patient safety incidents and the resulting harm relating to this treatment. We aimed to characterize patient safety incidents involving opioid substitution treatment with methadone or buprenorphine in community-based care by: (i) identifying the sources and nature of harm and (ii) describing and interpreting themes to identify priorities to focus future improvement work. Mixed-methods study examining patient safety incident reports involving opioid substitution treatment with either methadone or buprenorphine in community-based care. Data submitted between 2005 and 2015 from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS), a national repository of patient safety incident reports from across England and Wales. A total of 2284 reports were identified involving patients receiving community-based opioid substitution treatment. Incident type, contributory factors, incident outcome and severity of harm. Analysis involved data coding, processing and iterative generation of data summaries using descriptive statistical and thematic analysis. Most risks of harm from opioid substitution treatment came from failure in one of four processes of care delivery: prescribing opioid substitution (n=151); supervised dispensing (n=248); non-supervised dispensing (n=318); and monitoring and communication (n=1544). Most incidents resulting in harm involved supervised or non-supervised dispensing (n=91 of 127, 72%). Staff- (e.g. slips during task execution, not following protocols) and organization-related (e.g. poor working conditions or poor continuity of care between services) contributory factors were identified for more than half of incidents. Risks of harm in delivering opioid substitute treatment in England and Wales appear to arise out of failures in four processes: prescribing opioid substitution, supervised dispensing, non-supervised dispensing and monitoring and communication.

A mixed methods analysis of lithium-related patient safety incidents in primary care.

Background:Lithium is a drug with a narrow therapeutic range and has been associated with a number of serious adverse effects. This study aimed to characterise primary care lithium-related patient safety incidents submitted to the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) database with respect to incident origin, type, contributory factors and outcome. The intention was to identify ways to minimise risk to future patients by examining incidents with a range of harm outcomes.Methods:A mixed methods analysis of patient safety incident reports related to lithium was conducted. Data from healthcare organisations in England and Wales were extracted from the NRLS database. An exploratory descriptive analysis was undertaken to characterise the most frequent incident types, the associated chain of events and other contributory factors.Results:A total of 174 reports containing the term ‘lithium’ were identified. Of these, 41 were excluded and, from the remaining 133 reports, 138 incidents were identified and coded. Community pharmacies reported 100 incidents (96 dispensing related, two administration, two other), general practitioner (GP) practices filed 22 reports and 16 reports originated from other sources. A total of 99 dispensing-related incidents were recorded, 39 resulted from the wrong medication dispensed, 31 the wrong strength, 8 the wrong quantity and 21 other. A total of 128 contributory factors were identified overall; for dispensing incidents, the most common related to medication storage/packaging (n = 41), and ‘mistakes’ (n = 22), whereas no information regarding contributory factors was provided in 41 reports.Conclusion:Despite the established link between medication packaging and the risk of dispensing errors, our study highlighted storage and packaging as the most commonly described contributory factors to dispensing errors. The absence of certain relevant data limited the ability to fully characterise a number of reports. This highlighted the need to include clear and complete information when submitting reports. This, in turn, may help to better inform the further development of interventions designed to reduce the risk of incidents and improve patient safety.

Learning from diagnostic error when primary care services are located in or alongside emergency departments: a theory generating mixed-methods study

BackgroundNew healthcare service models are being introduced to help manage increasing demand on emergency healthcare systems including the provision of primary care services in or alongside emergency departments. There is little research evidence to guide decisions about how service models can be most effective and safe.AimFocusing on diagnostic error, the aim was to learn why errors occur to identify priority interventions.MethodTwo data sources were used to identify diagnostic error reports including: coroners’ reports to prevent future deaths; and the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS). A cross-sectional, mixed-methods theory-generating study which used a multi-axial PISA classification system based on the recursive model for incident analysis, was carried out.ResultsNine Coroners’ reports (from a total of 1347 community and hospital reports, 2013–2018) and 217 NRLS reports (from 13 million, 2005–2015) were identified describing diagnostic error with learning relevant to primary care services in or alongside emergency departments. Clinical presentations included musculoskeletal injuries; unwell infants; headaches; and chest pains. Findings highlighted a difficulty identifying appropriate patients for the primary care service; underinvestigation; misinterpretation of diagnostic tests; underuse of safeguarding protocols; and inadequate communication and referral pathways between the services.ConclusionPriority areas to minimise risk of diagnostic error when primary care services are located in or alongside emergency departments include clinical decision support to triage and stream patients to the appropriate care setting; contextualised, workplace-based education and training for primary care staff; and standardised computer systems, communication and referral pathways between emergency and primary care services.

A mixed methods analysis of clozapine errors reported to the National Reporting and Learning System.

To review and analyse medication errors related to clozapine, an atypical antipsychotic, that were reported to the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS). Following extraction of one year of clozapine related errors from the NRLS, a qualitative analysis (thematic analysis and re-classification) and quantitative analysis was performed. An incident was considered a clozapine error if there was a failure in its medication process (i.e. an error in the prescribing, dispensing, preparing, administering, monitoring or advising of clozapine). "Issues with stock/supply/ordering" was the most common theme derived from the qualitative thematic analysis (n=338), followed by wrong dose/strength/frequency (n=221) and medication omissions (n=202). Most errors occurred in the "administration/supply" medication stage. Over half of reported clozapine incidents involved people 26 to 55years old (n=830) and 82% of errors were reported by mental health services (n=1270). Only 1.5% of reports were classed as moderate/severe harm. Issues with availability, stock, and supply were found to be the most common causes. This usually entailed a lack of stock to fulfil a patient's dose/supply. Such incidents could potentially be reduced by improved management of the supply process, and liaison between pharmacy and clinical staff. The implementation of emergency drug cupboards at the discretion of an on-call pharmacist may prove to be a preventative measure for such errors. Despite the potential adverse effects associated with clozapine, very few incidents led to moderate/severe harm. Encouragement of NRLS reporting is recommended for incidents of all degrees of harm.

Midazolam use for dental conscious sedation: how safe are we?

Aim: To explore the safety awareness of midazolam use amongst dentist in the UK. Materials and methods: A cross-sectional study on 203 dentists was undertaken, 146 of whom currently practice conscious sedation using intravenous midazolam. Use of high strength midazolam; awareness of the Rapid Response Report (RRR) and the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS); and midazolam related incidents were explored. Results: Formal training in conscious sedation was variable with 35.6% holding a postgraduate sedation qualification. Flumazenil administration was common practice (63%) although used very selectively. Use to reverse respiratory depression was minimal (4%). Awareness of the RRR and the NRLS was generally low but higher among those working in general dental practice (p<0.05). Comparative analysis showed that high dose midazolam was administered more frequently in gastroenterology than in dentistry (p<0.001) with higher incidences of overdose (12.4% Vs 4.8%) and death (8.3% Vs 0%) within a 3 year period. Conclusions: High strength midazolam administration remains prevalent in dentistry, despite recommendations by the DoH. Use of flumazenil for reasons other than respiratory depression in dentistry should warrant little concern. The low incidence of reported harm is positive but may be due to a lack of uptake of national reporting systems.

A systematic review of patient safety in mental health: a protocol based on the inpatient setting.

BackgroundDespite the growing international interest in patient safety as a discipline, there has been a lack of exploration of its application to mental health. It cannot be assumed that findings based upon physical health in acute care hospitals can be applied to mental health patients, disorders and settings. To the authors’ knowledge, there has only been one review of the literature that focuses on patient safety research in mental health settings, conducted in Canada in 2008. We have identified a need to update this review and develop the methodology in order to strengthen the findings and disseminate internationally for advancement in the field. This systematic review will explore the existing research base on patient safety in mental health within the inpatient setting.MethodsTo conduct this systematic review, a thorough search across multiple databases will be undertaken, based upon four search facets (“mental health”, “patient safety”, “research” and “inpatient setting”). The search strategy has been developed based upon the Canadian review accompanied with input from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) taxonomy of patient safety incidents and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (fifth edition). The screening process will involve perspectives from at least two researchers at all stages with a third researcher invited to review when discrepancies require resolution. Initial inclusion and exclusion criteria have been developed and will be refined iteratively throughout the process. Quality assessment and data extraction of included articles will be conducted by at least two researchers. A data extraction form will be developed, piloted and iterated as necessary in accordance with the research question. Extracted information will be analysed thematically.DiscussionWe believe that this systematic review will make a significant contribution to the advancement of patient safety in mental health inpatient settings. The findings will enable the development and implementation of interventions to improve the quality of care experienced by patients and support the identification of future research priorities.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016034057 Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0365-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Improving patient safety in radiotherapy through error reporting and analysis

AimTo improve patient safety in radiotherapy (RT) through the analysis and publication of radiotherapy errors and near misses (RTE). Materials and methodsRTE are submitted on a voluntary basis by NHS RT departments throughout the UK to the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) or directly to Public Health England (PHE). RTE are analysed by PHE staff using frequency trend analysis based on the classification and pathway coding from Towards Safer Radiotherapy (TSRT). PHE in conjunction with the Patient Safety in Radiotherapy Steering Group publish learning from these events, on a triannual and summarised on a biennial basis, so their occurrence might be mitigated. ResultsSince the introduction of this initiative in 2010, over 30,000 (RTE) reports have been submitted. The number of RTE reported in each biennial cycle has grown, ranging from 680 (2010) to 12,691 (2016) RTE. The vast majority of the RTE reported are lower level events, thus not affecting the outcome of patient care. Of the level 1 and 2 incidents reported, it is known the majority of them affected only one fraction of a course of treatment. This means that corrective action could be taken over the remaining treatment fractions so the incident did not have a significant impact on the patient or the outcome of their treatment. Analysis of the RTE reports demonstrates that generation of error is not confined to one professional group or to any particular point in the pathway. It also indicates that the pattern of errors is replicated across service providers in the UK. ConclusionUse of the terminology, classification and coding of TSRT, together with implementation of the national voluntary reporting system described within this report, allows clinical departments to compare their local analysis to the national picture. Further opportunities to improve learning from this dataset must be exploited through development of the analysis and development of proactive risk management strategies.

Review of never and serious events related to dentistry 2005-2014.

Aims To review never and serious events related to dentistry between 2005-2014 in England.Methods Data from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS), with agreed data protection and intelligence governance, was used - snapshot view using the timeframe January 2005 to May 2014. The Strategic Executive Information System (STEIS) database was reported separately for 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. The free text elements from the database were analysed thematically and reclassified according to the nature of the patient safety incident (PSI).Results From the NRLS dataset, 32,263 patient safety events were reported between 1 January 2005 and 30 May 2014. Never events (NEs) from STEIS files were all wrong site extractions (WSS), reported separately for 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. The total number was 43.36 of the 43 PSIs were WSS involving: multiple extractions and bimodal age distribution (very young or over 60 years). Forty-seven percent of never events resulted in no harm, 20% low harm, 7% moderate harm, less than 1% severe harm and 23 deaths over this period (five of which were not related to dentistry). Serious harm and death risk factors included: care in an acute trust ward, peri oncological, reconstructive surgery (OMFS), patient age over 67 years with concurrent medical complexity (Ischaemic heart disease). Sixty percent of PSIs occurred in OS/OMFS in acute trust inpatients and 20% in primary care. From STEIS 2012-2013, 21 WSS were reported of which 50% occurred in oral surgery (OS) or oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS). The reported sites were 45% in operating theatre and 42% in dental surgery.Conclusion Incidences of iatrogenic harm to dental patients do occur but their reporting is not widely carried out. Improved awareness and training, simplifying the reporting systems improved non-punitive support by regulators would allow the improvement of patient safety in dental practise.