The key incident monitoring and management system - history and role in quality improvement

被引:20
|
作者
Badrick, Tony [1 ]
Gay, Stephanie [1 ]
Mackay, Mark [1 ]
Sikaris, Ken [2 ]
机构
[1] RCPAQAP, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] Melbourne Pathol, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
关键词
Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA); post-analytical error; pre-analytical error; Quality Indicators; LABORATORY MEDICINE; CLINICAL LABORATORIES; INDICATORS; EXPERIENCE; PROGRAM; PHASE;
D O I
10.1515/cclm-2017-0219
中图分类号
R446 [实验室诊断]; R-33 [实验医学、医学实验];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
Background: The determination of reliable, practical Quality Indicators (QIs) from presentation of the patient with a pathology request form through to the clinician receiving the report (the Total Testing Process or TTP) is a key step in identifying areas where improvement is necessary in laboratories. Methods: The Australasian QIs programme Key Incident Monitoring and Management System (KIMMS) began in 2008. It records incidents (process defects) and episodes (occasions at which incidents may occur) to calculate incident rates. KIMMS also uses the Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA) to assign quantified risk to each incident type. The system defines risk as incident frequency multiplied by both a harm rating (on a 1-10 scale) and detection difficulty score (also a 1-10 scale). Results: Between 2008 and 2016, laboratories participating rose from 22 to 69. Episodes rose from 13.2 to 43.4 million; incidents rose from 114,082 to 756,432. We attribute the rise in incident rate from 0.86% to 1.75% to increased monitoring. Haemolysis shows the highest incidence (22.6% of total incidents) and the highest risk (26.68% of total risk). "Sample is suspected to be from the wrong patient" has the second lowest frequency, but receives the highest harm rating (10/10) and detection difficulty score (10/10), so it is calculated to be the 8th highest risk (2.92%). Similarly, retracted (incorrect) reports QI has the 10th highest frequency (3.9%) but the harm/difficulty calculation confers the second highest risk (11.17%). Conclusions: TTP incident rates are generally low (less than 2% of observed episodes), however, incident risks, their frequencies multiplied by both ratings of harm and discovery difficulty scores, concentrate improvement attention and resources on the monitored incident types most important to manage.
引用
收藏
页码:264 / 272
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Improvement of Human Resource Management in the Quality Management System of the Enterprise
    Mozhaeva, Tatyana
    X INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC AND PRACTICAL CONFERENCE INNOVATIONS IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (ISPCIME-2019), 2019, 297
  • [22] Blood culture quality assurance: findings from a RCPAQAP Key Incident Monitoring and Management Systems (KIMMS) audit of blood culture performance
    Elvy, Juliet
    Haremza, Elizabeth
    Morris, Arthur J.
    Whiley, Michael
    Gay, Stephanie
    PATHOLOGY, 2023, 55 (06) : 850 - 854
  • [23] On the Role of Software Quality Management in Software Process Improvement
    Jacobsen, Jan Wiedemann
    Kuhrmann, Marco
    Muench, Juergen
    Diebold, Philipp
    Felderer, Michael
    PRODUCT-FOCUSED SOFTWARE PROCESS IMPROVEMENT (PROFES 2016), 2016, 10027 : 327 - 343
  • [24] The roles of senior management in quality improvement efforts: What are the key components?
    Bradley, EH
    Holmboe, ES
    Mattera, JA
    Roumanis, SA
    Radford, MJ
    Krumholz, HM
    JOURNAL OF HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, 2003, 48 (01) : 15 - 28
  • [25] INCIDENT MANAGEMENT - THE KEY TO SUCCESSFUL TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT IN TORONTO
    KORPAL, PR
    ITE JOURNAL-INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, 1992, 62 (03): : 58 - 61
  • [26] Quality Management System as a Tool for Improvement of the Dutch Pharmacovigilance System
    Zweers, P. G. M. A.
    van Puijenbroek, E. P.
    van Grootheest, A. C.
    DRUG SAFETY, 2009, 32 (10) : 896 - 897
  • [27] Integrated Risk Monitoring in the Quality Management System
    Silverio, Jorge
    Pestana, Gabriel F.
    INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND TECHNOLOGIES, WORLDCIST 2022, VOL 3, 2022, 470 : 3 - 12
  • [28] Question Quality Improvement: Deep Question Understanding for Incident Management in Technical Support Domain
    Ray, Anupama
    Hadhazi, Csaba
    Aggarwal, Pooja
    Dasgupta, Gargi
    Paradkar, Amit
    THIRTY-FOURTH AAAI CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, THE THIRTY-SECOND INNOVATIVE APPLICATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CONFERENCE AND THE TENTH AAAI SYMPOSIUM ON EDUCATIONAL ADVANCES IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2020, 34 : 13196 - 13203
  • [29] ROLE OF RESPONSIBILITY IN THE QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
    Krivokapic, Zdravko
    Stefanovic, Miladin
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR QUALITY RESEARCH, 2020, 14 (03) : 805 - 815
  • [30] KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (KPIs) IN THE QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
    Balon, Urszula
    Dziadkowiec, Joanna M.
    Niewczas-Dobrowolska, Magdalena
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR QUALITY RESEARCH, 2024, 18 (02) : 473 - 486