Incident reporting and level of MR safety education: A Danish national study

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Standard

Incident reporting and level of MR safety education : A Danish national study. / Blankholm, A. D.; Hansson, B.

I: Radiography, Bind 26, Nr. 2, 05.2020, s. 147-153.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Blankholm, A. D. ; Hansson, B. / Incident reporting and level of MR safety education : A Danish national study. I: Radiography. 2020 ; Bind 26, Nr. 2. s. 147-153.

Bibtex

@article{a6843459f572445296eeb7a30b37ee2f,
title = "Incident reporting and level of MR safety education: A Danish national study",
abstract = "Introduction: MR-safety remains a concern among MR professionals. We aimed to evaluate the extent of MR-related incidents using a national database and a questionnaire among MR professionals and to identify possible predictors for MR-related incidents. Methods: MR-related incidents reported to a national database from 2015 to 2017 were scrutinized. A national online survey focussing on MR safety and education was performed. Quantitative analyses, descriptive statistics and regression analyses were used. Results: The database included 196, 97 and 100 direct MR-related incidents in 2015, 2016 and 2017, respectively. Regarding the questionnaire, 208 MR professionals responded. Within the last year, 33% had been involved in an MR-related incident that was reported in the national database. At some time in their working life, 53% had been involved in an MR-related incident that was reported, but 25% had been involved in an incident that was not reported. The responses to the questionnaire reflected far more incidents than those reported to the database for all categories. Sixty-one percent of respondents indicated that external personnel in the MR environment are a safety risk. External personnel in the MR environment were found to be a predictor for reported and unreported MR-related incidents with odds ratio (OR) = 2.07; p = 0.033 and OR = 5.17; p = 0.0005 respectively. Conclusion: There seems to be severe underreporting of MR-related incidents. External personnel in the MR-environment and scanning patients in anaesthesia were found to be predictors for both reported and unreported MR-related incidents. Regulations regarding the minimum required MR safety education of different groups of MR professionals and external personnel are recommended. Implications for practice: Enforcing MR safety education and highlighting the importance of MR safety within hospital organisations would contribute to better patient and personnel safety.",
keywords = "MR safety, MR safety education, MR safety incident reporting, Patient safety",
author = "Blankholm, {A. D.} and B. Hansson",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2019 The College of Radiographers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.",
year = "2020",
month = may,
doi = "10.1016/j.radi.2019.10.007",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "147--153",
journal = "Radiography",
issn = "1078-8174",
publisher = "W.B.Saunders Co. Ltd.",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Incident reporting and level of MR safety education

T2 - A Danish national study

AU - Blankholm, A. D.

AU - Hansson, B.

N1 - Copyright © 2019 The College of Radiographers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

PY - 2020/5

Y1 - 2020/5

N2 - Introduction: MR-safety remains a concern among MR professionals. We aimed to evaluate the extent of MR-related incidents using a national database and a questionnaire among MR professionals and to identify possible predictors for MR-related incidents. Methods: MR-related incidents reported to a national database from 2015 to 2017 were scrutinized. A national online survey focussing on MR safety and education was performed. Quantitative analyses, descriptive statistics and regression analyses were used. Results: The database included 196, 97 and 100 direct MR-related incidents in 2015, 2016 and 2017, respectively. Regarding the questionnaire, 208 MR professionals responded. Within the last year, 33% had been involved in an MR-related incident that was reported in the national database. At some time in their working life, 53% had been involved in an MR-related incident that was reported, but 25% had been involved in an incident that was not reported. The responses to the questionnaire reflected far more incidents than those reported to the database for all categories. Sixty-one percent of respondents indicated that external personnel in the MR environment are a safety risk. External personnel in the MR environment were found to be a predictor for reported and unreported MR-related incidents with odds ratio (OR) = 2.07; p = 0.033 and OR = 5.17; p = 0.0005 respectively. Conclusion: There seems to be severe underreporting of MR-related incidents. External personnel in the MR-environment and scanning patients in anaesthesia were found to be predictors for both reported and unreported MR-related incidents. Regulations regarding the minimum required MR safety education of different groups of MR professionals and external personnel are recommended. Implications for practice: Enforcing MR safety education and highlighting the importance of MR safety within hospital organisations would contribute to better patient and personnel safety.

AB - Introduction: MR-safety remains a concern among MR professionals. We aimed to evaluate the extent of MR-related incidents using a national database and a questionnaire among MR professionals and to identify possible predictors for MR-related incidents. Methods: MR-related incidents reported to a national database from 2015 to 2017 were scrutinized. A national online survey focussing on MR safety and education was performed. Quantitative analyses, descriptive statistics and regression analyses were used. Results: The database included 196, 97 and 100 direct MR-related incidents in 2015, 2016 and 2017, respectively. Regarding the questionnaire, 208 MR professionals responded. Within the last year, 33% had been involved in an MR-related incident that was reported in the national database. At some time in their working life, 53% had been involved in an MR-related incident that was reported, but 25% had been involved in an incident that was not reported. The responses to the questionnaire reflected far more incidents than those reported to the database for all categories. Sixty-one percent of respondents indicated that external personnel in the MR environment are a safety risk. External personnel in the MR environment were found to be a predictor for reported and unreported MR-related incidents with odds ratio (OR) = 2.07; p = 0.033 and OR = 5.17; p = 0.0005 respectively. Conclusion: There seems to be severe underreporting of MR-related incidents. External personnel in the MR-environment and scanning patients in anaesthesia were found to be predictors for both reported and unreported MR-related incidents. Regulations regarding the minimum required MR safety education of different groups of MR professionals and external personnel are recommended. Implications for practice: Enforcing MR safety education and highlighting the importance of MR safety within hospital organisations would contribute to better patient and personnel safety.

KW - MR safety

KW - MR safety education

KW - MR safety incident reporting

KW - Patient safety

U2 - 10.1016/j.radi.2019.10.007

DO - 10.1016/j.radi.2019.10.007

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 32052744

AN - SCOPUS:85075427551

VL - 26

SP - 147

EP - 153

JO - Radiography

JF - Radiography

SN - 1078-8174

IS - 2

ER -