The aim of this study was to develop a multi‐professionally agreed list of adverse events, which may act as a prompt for clinical incident reporting in trauma and orthopaedics and to determine what healthcare professionals understand by the term adverse event. A modified Delphi process with healthcare professionals working in trauma and orthopaedics (242) in three NHS trusts was performed. The process involved initial brainstorming sessions, a two‐round Likert‐style postal questionnaire and final focus group discussion. The initial brainstorming sessions generated a list of 224 adverse events to be included in the first round of the postal questionnaire. They included 83 causes of adverse events, 36 health and safety related adverse events and 105 clinical adverse events. Following the second round questionnaire and focus group discussion, a final list of 20 adverse events was produced. There were variations between professional groups in terms of validity scoring of individual adverse events. Overall, medical staff gave a lower rating to the adverse events than the other two professional groups. There were also variations between professional groups in terms of response rates. The modified Delphi process proved to be a successful tool for generating a multi‐professionally agreed list of adverse events and for understanding what healthcare professionals understand by the term adverse event.
Giles, S., Cook, G., Jones, M., Todd, B., Mason, M. and Walshe, K. (2004), "Developing a multi‐professionally agreed list of adverse events for clinical incident reporting in trauma and orthopaedics", Clinical Governance: An International Journal, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 225-230. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777270410566634
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2004, Emerald Group Publishing Limited