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 Shaw, R Articles by Williams, S Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Shaw, R Articles by Williams, S

Adverse events and near miss reporting in the NHS

¹ National Patient Safety Agency, London, UK
² Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK

Correspondence to:
Professor R Shaw Objectives: To conduct a multicentre study on adverse event and near miss reporting in the NHS and to explore the feasibility of creating a national system for collecting these data.

Design: Prospective voluntary reporting by staff with anonymised transfer of data was used by a national system to collect data from 18 NHS trusts.

Participants: Staff from 12 acute trusts, three mental health trusts, two ambulance trusts, and one primary care trust.

Main outcomes measured: Number of incidents, date and time of incident, patient age and sex, clinical speciality, location, outcome, risk rating, type and description of incident.

Results: A total of 28 998 incidents were reported including 11 766 (41%) slips, trips and falls, 2514 (9%) medication management incidents, 2429 (8%) resource issues, and 2164 (7%) treatment issues. 138 catastrophic and 260 major adverse outcomes were reported. Slips, trips and falls (n = 11 766) were the most common type of incident.

Conclusions: Voluntary reporting by staff when linked to a multicentre data collecting system can yield information on a large number of incidents. This provides support for the principle of creating a national IT system to collect and analyse incident data.

Keywords: patient safety; incident reporting; adverse events

This article has been cited by other articles:

				O. Kostopoulou, B. C Delaney, and C. W Munro Diagnostic difficulty and error in primary care--a systematic review Fam. Pract., December 1, 2008; 25(6): 400 - 413. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M A B Makeham, S Stromer, C Bridges-Webb, M Mira, D C Saltman, C Cooper, and M R Kidd Patient safety events reported in general practice: a taxonomy Qual. Saf. Health Care, February 1, 2008; 17(1): 53 - 57. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				O. Kostopoulou Do GPs report diagnostic errors? Fam. Pract., February 1, 2008; 25(1): 1 - 2. [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. K Nuckols, D. S Bell, H. Liu, S. M Paddock, and L. H Hilborne Rates and types of events reported to established incident reporting systems in two US hospitals Qual. Saf. Health Care, June 1, 2007; 16(3): 164 - 168. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				O. Kostopoulou and B. Delaney Confidential reporting of patient safety events in primary care: results from a multilevel classification of cognitive and system factors Qual. Saf. Health Care, April 1, 2007; 16(2): 95 - 100. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M D Witham, P M Jenkins, and M E T McMurdo Using a sentinel adverse incident audit on a Medicine for the Elderly ward Qual. Saf. Health Care, December 1, 2006; 15(6): 446 - 447. [Full Text] [PDF]

				H J Murff and R S Dittus Near misses and research subjects. Qual. Saf. Health Care, August 1, 2006; 15(4): 228 - 229. [Full Text] [PDF]