The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Adverse events in anaesthetic practice: qualitative study of definition, discussion and reporting

Adverse events in anaesthetic practice: qualitative study of definition, discussion and reporting
Adverse events in anaesthetic practice: qualitative study of definition, discussion and reporting
Background. This study aimed to explore how critical and acceptable practice are defined in anaesthesia and how this influences the discussion and reporting of adverse incidents.
Method. We conducted workplace observations of, and interviews with, anaesthetists and anaesthetic staff. Transcripts were analysed qualitatively for recurrent themes and quantitatively for adverse events in anaesthetic process witnessed. We also observed departmental audit meetings and analysed meeting minutes and report forms.
Results. The educational value of discussing events was well-recognized; 28 events were discussed at departmental meetings, of which 5 (18%) were presented as ‘critical incidents’. However, only one incident was reported formally. Our observations of anaesthetic practice revealed 103 minor events during the course of over 50 anaesthetic procedures, but none were acknowledged as offering the potential to improve safety, although some were direct violations of ‘acceptable’ practice. Formal reporting appears to be constrained by changing boundaries of what might be considered ‘critical’, by concerns of loss of control over formally reported incidents and by the perception that reporting schemes outside anaesthesia have purposes other than education.
Conclusions. Despite clear official definitions of criticality in anaesthesia, there is ambiguity in how these are applied in practice. Many educationally useful events fall outside critical incident reporting schemes. Professional expertise in anaesthesia brings its own implicit safety culture but the reluctance to adopt a more explicit ‘systems approach’ to adverse events may impede further gains in patient safety in anaesthesia.
anaesthetists, risks, complications, accidents, incident reporting, safety, patients
0007-0912
715-721
Smith, A.F.
628d52dc-ef76-40b6-9b86-7c809392878d
Goodwin, D.
44ea5b5f-3933-4171-83b6-8d48928e27ca
Mort, M.
0c5eea61-4f65-4520-92bd-7b4ead7e1247
Pope, C.
21ae1290-0838-4245-adcf-6f901a0d4607
Smith, A.F.
628d52dc-ef76-40b6-9b86-7c809392878d
Goodwin, D.
44ea5b5f-3933-4171-83b6-8d48928e27ca
Mort, M.
0c5eea61-4f65-4520-92bd-7b4ead7e1247
Pope, C.
21ae1290-0838-4245-adcf-6f901a0d4607

Smith, A.F., Goodwin, D., Mort, M. and Pope, C. (2006) Adverse events in anaesthetic practice: qualitative study of definition, discussion and reporting. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 96 (6), 715-721. (doi:10.1093/bja/ael099).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background. This study aimed to explore how critical and acceptable practice are defined in anaesthesia and how this influences the discussion and reporting of adverse incidents.
Method. We conducted workplace observations of, and interviews with, anaesthetists and anaesthetic staff. Transcripts were analysed qualitatively for recurrent themes and quantitatively for adverse events in anaesthetic process witnessed. We also observed departmental audit meetings and analysed meeting minutes and report forms.
Results. The educational value of discussing events was well-recognized; 28 events were discussed at departmental meetings, of which 5 (18%) were presented as ‘critical incidents’. However, only one incident was reported formally. Our observations of anaesthetic practice revealed 103 minor events during the course of over 50 anaesthetic procedures, but none were acknowledged as offering the potential to improve safety, although some were direct violations of ‘acceptable’ practice. Formal reporting appears to be constrained by changing boundaries of what might be considered ‘critical’, by concerns of loss of control over formally reported incidents and by the perception that reporting schemes outside anaesthesia have purposes other than education.
Conclusions. Despite clear official definitions of criticality in anaesthesia, there is ambiguity in how these are applied in practice. Many educationally useful events fall outside critical incident reporting schemes. Professional expertise in anaesthesia brings its own implicit safety culture but the reluctance to adopt a more explicit ‘systems approach’ to adverse events may impede further gains in patient safety in anaesthesia.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 2006
Keywords: anaesthetists, risks, complications, accidents, incident reporting, safety, patients

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 42981
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/42981
ISSN: 0007-0912
PURE UUID: db4622f8-bf7f-4a29-a63a-97ed16875d4e
ORCID for C. Pope: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-8935-6702

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 05 Jan 2007
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 08:51

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: A.F. Smith
Author: D. Goodwin
Author: M. Mort
Author: C. Pope ORCID iD

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×