Evaluating the effectiveness of a multi‐professionally agreed list of adverse events for clinical incident reporting in Trauma and Orthopaedics: A follow‐up study

Abstract

Purpose

The first phase of this study developed a multi‐professionally agreed list of adverse events for clinical incident reporting in Trauma and Orthopaedics. This follow‐up study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the adverse event list.

Design/methodology/approach

Two follow‐up questionnaires were sent to healthcare professionals working in Trauma and Orthopaedics in two of the participating National Health Service (NHS) Trusts (n=247 for the first questionnaire and n=240 for the second questionnaire). Trends in routine incident reporting data were also monitored over a two‐year period to determine the impact of the adverse event list on levels of adverse event reporting.

Findings

The questionnaires indicated that awareness about the adverse event list was good and improved between questionnaires. However usage of the adverse event list appeared to be poor. Multiple regression analysis with the dependent variable count of orthopaedic incidents suggested that the adverse event list had little, if any impact on levels of reporting in Trauma and Orthopaedics.

Originality/value

The results of this study suggest that a practical tool, such as the adverse event list has little impact on incident reporting levels.

Citation

Giles, S.J., Cook, G.A., Jones, M.A., Todd, B., Mason, M., Muddu, B.N. and Walshe, K. (2005), "Evaluating the effectiveness of a multi‐professionally agreed list of adverse events for clinical incident reporting in Trauma and Orthopaedics: A follow‐up study", Clinical Governance: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 217-230. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777270510612866