PMID- 33037042
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20210616
LR  - 20210616
IS  - 2399-6641 (Electronic)
IS  - 2399-6641 (Linking)
VI  - 9
IP  - 4
DP  - 2020 Oct
TI  - Prioritising recommendations following analyses of adverse events in healthcare: 
      a systematic review.
LID - 10.1136/bmjoq-2019-000843 [doi]
LID - e000843
AB  - PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to identify an appropriate 
      method-a user-friendly and validated method-that prioritises recommendations 
      following analyses of adverse events (AEs) based on objective features. DATA 
      SOURCES: The electronic databases PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase (Ovid), Cochrane 
      Library, PsycINFO (Ovid) and ERIC (Ovid) were searched. STUDY SELECTION: Studies 
      were considered eligible when reporting on methods to prioritise recommendations. 
      DATA EXTRACTION: Two teams of reviewers performed the data extraction which was 
      defined prior to this phase. RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Eleven methods were 
      identified that are designed to prioritise recommendations. After completing the 
      data extraction, none of the methods met all the predefined criteria. Nine 
      methods were considered user-friendly. One study validated the developed method. 
      Five methods prioritised recommendations based on objective features, not 
      affected by personal opinion or knowledge and expected to be reproducible by 
      different users. CONCLUSION: There are several methods available to prioritise 
      recommendations following analyses of AEs. All these methods can be used to 
      discuss and select recommendations for implementation. None of the methods is a 
      user-friendly and validated method that prioritises recommendations based on 
      objective features. Although there are possibilities to further improve their 
      features, the 'Typology of safety functions' by de Dianous and Fievez, and the 
      'Hierarchy of hazard controls' by McCaughan have the most potential to select 
      high-quality recommendations as they have only a few clearly defined categories 
      in a well-arranged ordinal sequence.
CI  - (c) Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published 
      by BMJ.
FAU - Bos, Kelly
AU  - Bos K
AD  - Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC - location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands 
      k.bos@amsterdamumc.nl.
FAU - van der Laan, Maarten J
AU  - van der Laan MJ
AD  - Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the 
      Netherlands.
FAU - Dongelmans, Dave A
AU  - Dongelmans DA
AD  - Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam UMC - location AMC, Amsterdam, 
      the Netherlands.
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
PT  - Systematic Review
PL  - England
TA  - BMJ Open Qual
JT  - BMJ open quality
JID - 101710381
SB  - IM
MH  - Delivery of Health Care/*methods/statistics & numerical data
MH  - Health Priorities/*standards/statistics & numerical data
MH  - Humans
MH  - Medical Errors/*statistics & numerical data
MH  - Quality Improvement
PMC - PMC7549482
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - adverse events
OT  - epidemiology and detection
OT  - incident reporting
OT  - patient safety
OT  - quality improvement
OT  - root cause analysis
COIS- Competing interests: None declared.
EDAT- 2020/10/11 06:00
MHDA- 2021/06/17 06:00
PMCR- 2020/10/09
CRDT- 2020/10/10 05:28
PHST- 2019/09/27 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2020/07/01 00:00 [revised]
PHST- 2020/09/18 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2020/10/10 05:28 [entrez]
PHST- 2020/10/11 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2021/06/17 06:00 [medline]
PHST- 2020/10/09 00:00 [pmc-release]
AID - bmjoq-2019-000843 [pii]
AID - 10.1136/bmjoq-2019-000843 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - BMJ Open Qual. 2020 Oct;9(4):e000843. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2019-000843.