Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Bell, Brian G; Campbell, Stephen; Carson-Stevens, Andrew; Evans, Huw Prosser; Cooper, Alison; Sheehan, Christina; Rodgers, Sarah; Johnson, Christine; Edwards, Adrian; Armstrong, Sarah; Mehta, Rajnikant; Chuter, Antony; Donnelly, Ailsa; Ashcroft, Darren M; Lymn, Joanne; Smith, Pam; Sheikh, Aziz; Boyd, Matthew; Avery, Anthony J (2017)
Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group
Journal: BMJ Open
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Protocol, 1696, General practice / Family practice, PRIMARY CARE, Journal Article, 1506, 1704, 1703, GENERAL MEDICINE (see Internal Medicine), RA
Introduction: Most patient safety research has\ud focused on specialist-care settings where there is an\ud appreciation of the frequency and causes of medical\ud errors, and the resulting burden of adverse events.\ud There have, however, been few large-scale robust\ud studies that have investigated the extent and severity of\ud avoidable harm in primary care. To address this, we\ud will conduct a 12-month retrospective cross-sectional\ud study involving case note review of primary care\ud patients.\ud Methods and analysis: We will conduct electronic\ud searches of general practice (GP) clinical computer\ud systems to identify patients with avoidable significant\ud harm. Up to 16 general practices from 3 areas of\ud England (East Midlands, London and the North West)\ud will be recruited based on practice size, to obtain a\ud sample of around 100 000 patients. Our investigations\ud will include an ‘enhanced sample’ of patients with the\ud highest risk of avoidable significant harm. We will\ud estimate the incidence of avoidable significant harm\ud and express this as ‘per 100 000 patients per year’.\ud Univariate and multivariate analysis will be conducted\ud to identify the factors associated with avoidable\ud significant harm.\ud Ethics/Dissemination: The decision regarding\ud participation by general practices in the study is entirely\ud voluntary; the consent to participate may be withdrawn\ud at any time. We will not seek individual patient consent\ud for the retrospective case note review, but if patients\ud respond to publicity about the project and say they do\ud not wish their records to be included, we will follow\ud these instructions. We will produce a report for the\ud Department of Health’s Policy Research Programme and\ud several high-quality peer-reviewed publications in\ud scientific journals. The study has been granted a\ud favourable opinion by the East Midlands Nottingham 2\ud Research Ethics Committee (reference 15/EM/0411) and\ud Confidentiality Advisory Group approval for access to\ud medical records without consent under section 251 of\ud the NHS Act 2006 (reference 15/CAG/0182).
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. Leape LL, Brennan TA, Laird NM, et al. The nature of adverse events in hospitalised patients: results from the Harvard Medical Practice Study II. N Engl J Med 1991;324:377-84.
    • 2. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS (Institute of Medicine). To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2000.
    • 3. Vincent C, Neale G, Woloshynowych M. Adverse events in British hospitals: preliminary retrospective record review. BMJ 2001;322:517-19.
    • 4. Expert Group on Learning from Adverse Events in the NHS. An organisation with a memory. London: Stationery Office, 2000. http:// patientsafety.health.org.uk/resources/organisation-memory (accessed 14 Nov 2014)
    • 5. Landrigan CP, Parry GJ, Bones CB, et al. Temporal trends in rates of patient harm resulting from medical care. N Engl J Med 2010;363:2124-34.
    • 6. Baker GR, Norton PG, Flintoft V, et al. The Canadian adverse events study: the incidence of adverse events among hospital patients in Canada. CMAJ 2004;170:1678-86.
    • 7. Brennan TA, Leape LL, Laird NM, et al. Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalised patients: results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I. 1991. Qual Saf Health Care 2004;13:145-51.
    • 8. Davis P, Lay-Yee R, Briant R, et al. Adverse events in New Zealand public hospitals l. Occurrence and impact. N Z Med J 2002;115:U271.
    • 9. Schiøler T, Lipczak H, Pedersen BL, et al., Danish Adverse Event Study. Incidence of adverse events in hospitals. A retrospective study of medical records. Ugeskr Laeg 2001;163:5370-8.
    • 10. Thomas EJ, Studdert DM, Burstin HR, et al. Incidence and types of adverse events and negligent care in Utah and Colorado. Med Care 2000;38:261-71.
    • 11. Lorincz C, Drazen E, Sokol P, et al. Research in ambulatory patient safety 2000-2010: a 10-year review. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association, 2011.
    • 12. Sheikh A, Panesar SS, Larizgoitia I, et al. Safer primary care for all -a global imperative. Lancet Glob Health 2013;1:e182-3.
    • 13. Panesar SS, deSilva D, Carson-Stevens A, et al. How safe is primary care? A systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf 2016;25:544-53.
    • 14. APEAS Study. Patient safety in primary health care. Madrid: Ministry of Health and Consumer Affairs, 2008.
    • 15. Deloitte Centre for Health Solutions. Primary care: today and tomorrow. Improving general practice by working differently. 2012. http://www.practicemanagement.org.uk/uploads/uk-chs-primarycare. pdf (accessed 2 Jun 2016).
    • 16. Hogan H, Healey F, Neale G, et al. Preventable deaths due to problems in care in English acute hospitals: a retrospective case record review study. BMJ Qual Saf 2012;21:737-45.
    • 17. Parry G, Cline A, Goldmann D. Deciphering harm measurement. JAMA 2012;307:2155-6.
    • 18. Dalton D, Williams I. Building a culture of candour Royal College of Surgeons. 2014. http://www.rcseng.ac.uk/policy/documents/ CandourreviewFinal.pdf (accessed 2 Jun 2016).
    • 19. Williams H, Edwards A, Hibbert P, et al. Harms from discharge to primary care: mixed methods analysis of incident reports. Br J Gen Pract 2015;65:e829-37.
    • 20. Avery AJ, Savelyich BS, et al. Identifying and establishing consensus on the most important safety features of GP computer systems: e-Delphi study. Inform Prim Care 2005;13:3-11.
    • 21. Barber ND, Alldred DP, Raynor DK, et al. Care homes' use of medicines study: prevalence, causes and potential harm of medication errors in care homes for older people. Qual Saf Health Care 2009;18:341-6.
    • 22. Lowy A, Brazier J, Fall M. Quality minor surgery by general practitioners in 1990 and 1991. Br J Gen Pract 1994;44:364-5.
    • 23. King's Fund. PARR Combined Predictive Model. Final Report. 2006. http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/sites/files/kf/field/field_document/ PARR-combined-predictive-model-final-report-dec06.pdf (accessed 2 Jun 2016).
    • 24. Duerden M, Avery T, Payne R. Polypharmacy and medicines optimisation: making it safe and sound. The King's Fund, 2013.
    • 25. McKay J, Bradley N, Lough M, et al. A review of significant events analysed in general practice: implications for the quality and safety of patient care. BMC Fam Pract 2009;10:61.
    • 26. De Wet C, Bowie P. A preliminary development and testing of a global trigger tool to detect error and patient harm primary-care records. Postgrad Med J 2009;85:176-80.
    • 27. Carson-Stevens A, Hibbert P, Avery A, et al. A cross-sectional mixed methods study protocol to generate learning from patient safety incidents reported from general practice. BMJ Open 2015;5: e009079.
    • 28. Hibbert P, Runciman W, Deakin A. A recursive model of incident analysis. Australian Patient Safety Foundation. 2007. http://www. apsf.net.au/dbfiles/A%20Recursive%20Model%20of%20Incident% 20Analysis.pdf (accessed 6 Jun 2016).
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.