HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Runciman, W B Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Runciman, W B

Lessons from the Australian Patient Safety Foundation: setting up a national patient safety surveillance system—is this the right model?

Correspondence to:
Professor WB Runciman, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Royal Adelaide Hospital, North Terrace, Adelaide SA 5000, Australia;
wrunciman{at}bigpond.com
ABSTRACT
The evolution of the concepts and processes underpinning the Australian Patient Safety Foundation's systems over the last 15 years are traced. An ideal system should have the following attributes: an independent organisation to coordinate patient safety surveillance; agreed frameworks for patient safety and surveillance systems; common, agreed standards and terminology; a single, clinically useful classification for things that go wrong in health care; a national repository for information covering all of health care from all available sources; mechanisms for setting priorities at local, national and international levels; a just system which caters for the rights of patients, society, and healthcare practitioners and facilities; separate processes for accountability and "systems learnings"; the right to anonymity and legal privilege for reporters; systems for rapid feedback and evidence of action; mechanisms for involving and informing all stakeholders. There are powerful reasons for establishing national systems, for aligning terminology, tools and classification systems internationally, and for rapid dissemination of successful strategies.

Keywords: patient safety; incident reporting; quality improvement

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T K Nuckols, D S Bell, S M Paddock, and L H Hilborne Contributing factors identified by hospital incident report narratives Qual. Saf. Health Care, October 1, 2008; 17(5): 368 - 372. [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]

				M. A. Ghaleb, N. Barber, B. D Franklin, V. W. Yeung, Z. F Khaki, and I. C. Wong Systematic Review of Medication Errors in Pediatric Patients Ann. Pharmacother., October 1, 2006; 40(10): 1766 - 1776. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. N. Merchant and P. M. Gully A survey of British Columbia anesthesiologists on a provincial critical incident reporting program: [Une enquete aupres des anesthesiologistes de la Colombie-Britannique sur un programme provincial de notification des incidents critiques] Can J Anesth, August 1, 2005; 52(7): 680 - 684. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W B Runciman and A F Merry Crises in clinical care: an approach to management Qual. Saf. Health Care, June 1, 2005; 14(3): 156 - 163. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G Neale Are the risks of hospital practice adequately recognised by incident reporting? Qual. Saf. Health Care, April 1, 2005; 14(2): 78 - 79. [Full Text] [PDF]

				O A Arah and N S Klazinga How safe is the safety paradigm? Qual. Saf. Health Care, June 1, 2004; 13(3): 226 - 232. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W B Runciman, M J Edmonds, and M Pradhan Setting priorities for patient safety Qual. Saf. Health Care, September 1, 2002; 11(3): 224 - 229. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]