Study of Reporting System for Adverse Events Related to Common Medical Devices at a Tertiary Care Public Sector Hospital in India

Authors: S. Kurien, S. Satpathy, S. K. Gupta, S. K. Arya, D. K. Sharma

Abstract:

Advances in the use of health care technology have resulted in increased adverse events (AEs) related to the use of medical devices. The study focused on the existing reporting systems. This study was conducted in a tertiary care public sector hospital. Devices included Syringe infusion pumps, Cardiac monitors, Pulse oximeters, Ventilators and Defibrillators. A total of 211 respondents were recruited. Interviews were held with 30 key informants. Medical records were scrutinized. Relevant statistical tests were used. Resident doctors reported maximum frequency of AEs, followed by nurses; and least by consultants. A significant association was found between the cadre of health care personnel and awareness that the patients and bystanders have a risk of sustaining AE. Awareness regarding reporting of AEs was low, and it was generally done verbally. Other critical findings are discussed in the light of the barriers to reporting, reasons for non-compliance, recording system, and so on.

Keywords: Adverse events, health care technology, public sector hospital, reporting systems.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1100216

References:

[1] Thomas AN, Galvin I. Patient safety incidents associated with equipment in critical care: a review of reports to the UK National Patient Safety Agency. Anaesthesia. 2008 Nov; 63(11):1193–7.
[2] Beydon L, Conreux F, Le Gall R, Safran D, Cazalaa JB. Analysis of the French health ministry’s national register of incidents involving medical devices in anaesthesia and intensive care. Br J Anaesth. 2001 Mar; 86(3): 382–7.
[3] Beydon L, Ledenmat PY, Soltner C, Lebreton F, Hardin V, Benhamou D, et al. Adverse events with medical devices in anesthesia and intensive care unit patients recorded in the French safety database in 2005-2006. Anesthesiology. 2010 Feb; 112(2):364–72.
[4] Medical Device Regulations-Global review and guiding principles, Internet. cited 2011 May 11. Available from: http://www.who.int/ medical_devices/publications/en/MD_Regulations.pdf
[5] QualityandsafetyinhealthcareHS-227-PromotingPatientSafetyatHealth Care.pdf Internet. Cited 2011 Sep 11. Available from: http://www.searo.who.int/LinkFiles/QualityandsafetyinhealthcareHS- 227-PromotingPatientSafetyatHealthCare.pdf
[6] Amoore J. Quality improvement report: Learning from adverse incidents involving medical devices. BMJ. 2002 Aug; 325(7358):272–5.
[7] Hefflin B. Estimates of medical device-associated adverse events from emergency departments*1. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2004 Oct; 27(3):246–53.
[8] Samore MH, Evans RS, Lassen A, Gould P, Lloyd J, Gardner RM, et al. Surveillance of medical device-related hazards and adverse events in hospitalized patients. JAMA. 2004 Jan 21;291(3):325–34.
[9] Kingston MJ, Evans SM, Smith BJ, Berry JG. Attitudes of doctors and nurses towards incident reporting: a qualitative analysis. MEDICAL Journal of Australia. 2004;181:36–9.
[10] Coyle YM. Effectiveness of a graduate medical education program for improving medical event reporting attitude and behavior. Quality and Safety in Health Care. 2005 Oct 1;14(5):383–8.
[11] Purnima. S. Tripathi. Death in the incubator. 2001 Dec 24 (cited 2011 May 9); 18(24). Available from: http://www.hinduonnet.com/ fline/fl1824/18240370.htm
[12] AIIMS. 53rd Annual Report, AIIMS Publications, 2008-2009, New Delhi.
[13] McConnell EA, Fletcher J. Agency registered nurse use of medical equipment: an Australian perspective. Int J Nurs Stud. 1995 Apr; 32(2):149–61.
[14] McConnell EA. How and what staff nurses learn about the medical devices they use in direct patient care. Res Nurs Health. 1995 Apr; 18(2):165–72.
[15] Gardner S, Flack M. Medical Device Provisions of FDA Modernization Act > Designing a Medical Device Surveillance Network (Internet). (cited 2012 Aug 21). Available from: http://www.fda.gov/ MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/Overview/MedicalDevi ceProvisionsofFDAModernizationAct/ucm168938.htm#4.1
[16] Lawton R, Parker D. Barriers to incident reporting in a healthcare system. QualSaf Health Care. 2002 Mar; 11(1):15–8.
[17] Barach P. Reporting and preventing medical mishaps: lessons from nonmedical near miss reporting systems. BMJ. 2000 Mar 18; 320(7237): 759–63.
[18] Liu A-P, Zhang L-M, Yan W, Zhang J-H, Zhu Y-P. (Analysis on evaluation of medical device adverse events monitoring and some factors influencing MDAE’s reporting by medical personnels). Zhongguo Yi Liao Qi XieZaZhi. 2008 Jan; 32(1):47–9.
[19] Evans SM, Berry JG, Smith BJ, Esterman AJ. Anonymity or transparency in reporting of medical error: a community-based survey in South Australia. Med. J. Aust. 2004 Jun 7; 180(11):577–80.
[20] Garg R, Bhalotra A, Pruthi A, Bhalotra P, Anand R, Gupta N. Awareness among resident doctors with regards to cardiac defibrillators. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia. 2010; 4(3):182.
[21] Brown AS. To what extent does medical device maintenance pose clinical risk? Clinical Risk. 2008 Mar 1; 14(2):59–62.
[22] Pittet D. Challenging the world: patient safety and health care-associated infection. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2006 Feb 1; 18(1):4–8.