AJR: Web-based event rad reporting system increases efficiency
A web-based event reporting system may erase some of the shortcomings associated with older safety reporting models in large radiology departments, noted researchers in a study published in the September issue of American Journal of Roentgenology.
The department of radiology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., developed a method to capture and analyze safety events in radiology in 2004. The first system was paper-based and, although it provided detailed information, the staff noted flaws relating to ease of use, implementation and data management. The department developed iterations of the system in the years before 2007, when the web-based version rolled out.
Among the improvements in the new system, researchers noted that it allows direct reporter entry of event information into the database, eliminating the paper form and thereby saving time and increasing accuracy. The system also allows more complete information gathering, and provides a searchable database to retrieve information.
“With the advent of an electronic method of reporting in 2007 along with an increase in awareness, an increased number of submissions were seen. The submissions continued to increase, with 690 in 2008 and an all time high of 1,116 in 2009,” wrote lead author Stacy R. Schultz, DO, and colleagues at Mayo. The system has since allowed the department to identify and address concerns and system shortcomings, and increased acceptance of event reporting by staff.
“With the enhancements to the reporting system performed in late 2008, reporting of monthly data to our operations groups had substantially improved,” wrote Schultz et al. “In 2009, monthly reports were sent to directors, supervisors and quality liaisons. Action is now taking place at an operational level and not always initiated by the quality office.”
As an example of their success, researchers noted that, during a three-week period, a number of patients left the department before nursing assessment after MRI with minimal sedation. The event reporting data allowed supervisors to identify where the events were occurring and analyze how to improve the process. “A corrective process, including placement of color-coded wristbands on sedated patients, was implemented. Data have been collected and since implementation of the new process, there has been a marked decrease in the number of patients leaving the department without postsedation assessment,” wrote Schultz et al.
“The overall beneft to patient safety appears to justify the financial and personnel costs associated with managing the system,” the authors concluded. “Challenges going forward include improving physician event reporting as well as providing better follow-up to reporters.”
The department of radiology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., developed a method to capture and analyze safety events in radiology in 2004. The first system was paper-based and, although it provided detailed information, the staff noted flaws relating to ease of use, implementation and data management. The department developed iterations of the system in the years before 2007, when the web-based version rolled out.
Among the improvements in the new system, researchers noted that it allows direct reporter entry of event information into the database, eliminating the paper form and thereby saving time and increasing accuracy. The system also allows more complete information gathering, and provides a searchable database to retrieve information.
“With the advent of an electronic method of reporting in 2007 along with an increase in awareness, an increased number of submissions were seen. The submissions continued to increase, with 690 in 2008 and an all time high of 1,116 in 2009,” wrote lead author Stacy R. Schultz, DO, and colleagues at Mayo. The system has since allowed the department to identify and address concerns and system shortcomings, and increased acceptance of event reporting by staff.
“With the enhancements to the reporting system performed in late 2008, reporting of monthly data to our operations groups had substantially improved,” wrote Schultz et al. “In 2009, monthly reports were sent to directors, supervisors and quality liaisons. Action is now taking place at an operational level and not always initiated by the quality office.”
As an example of their success, researchers noted that, during a three-week period, a number of patients left the department before nursing assessment after MRI with minimal sedation. The event reporting data allowed supervisors to identify where the events were occurring and analyze how to improve the process. “A corrective process, including placement of color-coded wristbands on sedated patients, was implemented. Data have been collected and since implementation of the new process, there has been a marked decrease in the number of patients leaving the department without postsedation assessment,” wrote Schultz et al.
“The overall beneft to patient safety appears to justify the financial and personnel costs associated with managing the system,” the authors concluded. “Challenges going forward include improving physician event reporting as well as providing better follow-up to reporters.”