[オーストリアの大学病院での重大な事件報告システムの進化]

BACKGROUND: Critical Incident Reporting Systems (CIRS) are an important tool to identify potential hazards in healthcare.However, in Europe CIR systems are differently used with respect to whether its use is voluntary or mandatory.The aim of the present paper was to describe the development of the recently implemented CIRS in the University Hospital Graz. METHODOLOGY: In 2012, in a pilot unit CIRS was implemented within an intensive care unit.その結果を評価した後、CIRSは2013年に大学病院Grazのすべての組織ユニットに実装されました。CIRSレポートの定義とCIRSレポートの処理は、CIRSマニュアルに記載されています。 RESULTS: On average, 1.6 CIRS reports per week were submitted in the University Hospital Graz.スイスの大学病院（週27 CIRSレポート）のデータと比較して、一般にCIRSが使用されていることが明らかになりますが、CIRSが一般的に知られているかどうか、CIRSの症例の進行に関する情報が十分に透明であるかどうかが明らかになります。 結論：全体として、CIRSの実装は比較的単純ですが、受け入れを達成し、それによって継続的なレポート、信頼、および重要なレポートの価値のない処理が必要です。Meetings with openly discussed case analysis could help to increase the awareness of CIRS among healthcare professionals.In Europe CIR systems are used in different ways.In Austria, both an academic exchange process on how to use CIRS and a common definition of CIRS reports has so far been lacking.オーストリアのガイダンス文書の準備をお勧めします。

BACKGROUND: Critical Incident Reporting Systems (CIRS) are an important tool to identify potential hazards in healthcare. However, in Europe CIR systems are differently used with respect to whether its use is voluntary or mandatory. The aim of the present paper was to describe the development of the recently implemented CIRS in the University Hospital Graz. METHODOLOGY: In 2012, in a pilot unit CIRS was implemented within an intensive care unit. After evaluating its results, CIRS was then implemented in all organizational units of the University Hospital Graz in 2013. The definition of a CIRS report as well as the processing of CIRS reports was described in a CIRS manual. RESULTS: On average, 1.6 CIRS reports per week were submitted in the University Hospital Graz. Compared to data from a university hospital in Switzerland (27 CIRS reports per week), it becomes evident that, in general, CIRS is used, but the question arises whether CIRS is commonly known and whether information on the proceeding of CIRS cases is sufficiently transparent. CONCLUSION: Overall, the implementation of CIRS is relatively simple, but in order to achieve acceptance and thereby continuous reports, trust and a value-free handling of critical reports is required. Meetings with openly discussed case analysis could help to increase the awareness of CIRS among healthcare professionals. In Europe CIR systems are used in different ways. In Austria, both an academic exchange process on how to use CIRS and a common definition of CIRS reports has so far been lacking. The preparation of a guidance document for Austria is recommended.