Background: Medication errors (MEs) pose risks to patient safety, resulting in substantial economic costs. To enhance patient safety and learning from incidents, health care and pharmacovigilance organizations systematically collect ME data through reporting systems. Despite the growing literature on MEs in reporting systems, an overview of methods used to analyze them is lacking.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFNo reviews so far have been conducted to define the constructs of patient-experienced quality in healthcare transitions or to identify existing generic measures of patients' experience of the quality within healthcare transitions. Our aim was to identify domains relevant for people experiencing healthcare transitions when evaluating the quality of care they have received, map the comprehensiveness of existing patient-reported experience measures (PREM), and evaluate the PREMs' content validity. The method was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institutes' guidance for scoping reviews.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFStaff observations are the most common source of data for driving improvements in care. However, the patient perspective should also be considered, and healthcare complaints offer concrete details that health organizations might otherwise overlook and that can highlight areas for learning and improvement in the healthcare system. However, because of the diverse nature of patient complaints, systematic analyses can be challenging.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFIntroduction: Medication errors (MEs) are associated with patient harm and high economic costs. Healthcare authorities and pharmacovigilance organisations in many countries routinely collect data on MEs via reporting systems to improve patient safety and for learning purposes. Different approaches have been developed and used for the ME analysis, but an overview of the scope of available methods currently is lacking.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF