Author:
Akiyama Naomi,Akiyama Tomoya,Sato Hideaki,Shiroiwa Takeru,Kishi Mitsuo
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Patient safety is associated with patient outcomes. However, there is insufficient evidence of patient safety in the dental field. This study aimed to compare incidents reported by dentists and physicians, compare the type of errors made by them, and identify how dentists prevent dental errors.
Methods
A mixed-methods study was conducted using open data from the Japan Council for Quality Health Care database. A total of 6071 incident reports submitted for the period 2016–2020 were analyzed; the number of dentists’ incident reports was 144, and the number of physicians’ incident reports was 5927.
Results
The percentage of dental intern reporters was higher than that of medical intern reporters (dentists: n = 12, 8.3%; physicians: n = 180, 3.0%; p = 0.002). The percentage of reports by dentists was greater than that by physicians: wrong part of body treated (dentists: n = 26, 18.1%; physicians: n = 120, 2.0%; p < 0.001), leaving foreign matter in the body (dentists: n = 15, 10.4%; physicians: n = 182, 3.1%; p < 0.001), and accidental ingestion (dentists: n = 8, 5.6%; physicians: n = 8, 0.1%; p < 0.001), and aspiration of foreign body (dentists: n = 5, 3.4%; physicians: n = 33, 0.6%; p = 0.002). The percentage of each type of prevention method utilized was as follows: software 27.8% (n = 292), hardware (e.g., developing a new system) 2.1% (n = 22), environment (e.g., coordinating the activities of staff) 4.2% (n = 44), liveware (e.g., reviewing procedure, double checking, evaluating judgement calls made) 51.6% (n = 542), and liveware-liveware (e.g., developing adequate treatment plans, conducting appropriate postoperative evaluations, selecting appropriate equipment and adequately trained medical staff) 14.3% (n = 150).
Conclusion
Hardware and software and environment components accounted for a small percentage of the errors made, while the components of liveware and liveware-liveware errors were larger. Human error cannot be prevented by individual efforts alone; thus, a systematic and holistic approach needs to be developed by the medical community.
Funder
Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference26 articles.
1. Makary MA, Daniel M. Medical error—the third leading cause of death in the US. BMJ. 2016;353:i2139. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i2139.
2. World Health Organization, Data and statistics. 2018. http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/Health-systems/patientsafety/data-and-statistics. Accessed 28 May 2020.
3. Ensaldo-Carrasco E, Suarez-Ortegon MF, Carson-Stevens A, Cresswell K, Bedi R, Sheikh A. Patient safety incidents and adverse events in ambulatory dental care: a systematic scoping review. J Patient Saf. 2021;17(5):381–91. https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000316.
4. Akiyama N, Uozumi R, Akiyama T, Koeda K, Shiroiwa T, Ogasawara K. Choking injuries: associated factors and error-producing conditions among acute hospital patients in Japan. PLoS One. 2022;27(4):e0267430. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267430.
5. Negelberg R. Medical errors in dentistry. Academy of general dentistry. 2015. https://dentalacademyofce.com/courses/2863/PDF/1509cei_Negalberg_web.pdf. Accessed 28 May 2020.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献