000			nab a22 7a 4500
999			_c17542 _d17542
003			PC17542
005			20230628110012.0
008			230628b xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_cH12O
041			_aspa
100			_91285 _aMurillo Pérez, María del Ara _eUCI
100			_91291 _aGarcía Iglesias, Mónica _eUCI
100			_93302 _aPalomino Sánchez, Iluminada _eMedicina Intensiva
100			_93303 _aCano Ruiz, G _eMedicina Intensiva
100			_91293 _aCuenca Solanas, Manuela _eMedicina Intensiva
100			_91090 _aAlted López, Emilio _eMedicina Intensiva
245	0	0	_aAnálisis del registro de un sistema de notificación de incidentes en una unidad de cuidados críticos. _h[artículo]
260			_bEnfermería intensiva, _c2016
300			_a27(3):112-9.
500			_aFormato Vancouver: Murillo Pérez MA, García Iglesias M, Palomino Sánchez I, Cano Ruiz G, Cuenca Solanas M, Alted López E. Análisis del registro de un sistema de notificación de incidentes en una unidad de cuidados críticos. Enferm Intensiva. 2016 Jul-Sep;27(3):112-9.
501			_aPMID: 27320867
504			_aContiene 22 referencias
520			_aObjective: To analyse the incident communicated through a notification system and register in a critical care unit. Methodology: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted by performing an analysis of the records of incidents communicated anonymously and voluntarily from January 2007 to December 2013 in a critical care unit of adult patients with severe trauma. Study variables: incident type and class, professional reports, and suggestions for improvement measures. A descriptive analysis was performed on the variables. Results: Out of a total of 275 incidents reported, 58.5% of them were adverse events. Incident distributed by classes: medication, 33.7%; vascular access-drainage-catheter-sensor, 19.6%; devices-equipment, 13.3%, procedures, 11.5%; airway tract and mechanical ventilation, 10%; nursing care, 4.1%; inter-professional communication, 3%; diagnostic test, 3%; patient identification, 1.1%, and transfusion 0.7%. In the medication group, administrative errors accounted for a total of 62%; in vascular access-drainage-catheter-sensor group, central venous lines, a total of 27%; in devices and equipment group, respirators, a total of 46.9%; in airway self-extubations, a total of 32.1%. As regards to medication errors, 62% were incidents without damage. Incident notification by profession: doctors, 43%, residents, 5.6%, nurses, 51%, and technical assistants, 0.4%. Conclusions: Adverse events are the most communicated incidents. The events related to medication administration are the most frequent, although most of them were without damage. Nurses and doctors communicate the incidents with the same frequency. In order to highlight the low incident notification despite it being an anonymous and volunteer system, therefore, it is suggested to study measurements to increase the level of communication.
710			_967 _aServicio de Medicina Intensiva
856			_uhttp://pc-h12o-es.m-hdoct.a17.csinet.es/pdf/pc/1/pc17542.pdf _ySolicitar documento
942			_2ddc _cART _n0