Patient safety in South Africa: PICU adverse event registration*
Jentien M Vermeulen1, Monique van Dijk, Cynthia van der Starre
11Department of Pediatric Intensive Care, Emma Children's Hospital/Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 2Department of Pediatric Intensive Care, Erasmus MC-Sophia Children's Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 3Department of Pediatrics, Subdivision of Neonatology, Erasmus MC-Sophia Children's Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 4Department of Pediatric Surgery, Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa. 5Department of Pediatric Intensive Care, Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital and School of Child and Adolescent Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Objective:
Adverse event registration is a means to improve patient safety in a PICU. So far it has been used in European and North American countries mainly. We studied adverse events in a South African setting with the aims to 1) assess rates and types of adverse events with two different registration methods and 2) describe characteristics of patients experiencing adverse events.
Design:
This study consisted of 1) a retrospective audit of randomly selected patient records and 2) a prospective observational study of real-time registration of AEs during ward rounds. Adverse events were identified using the Child Health Corporation of America - Pediatric Pharmacy Advocacy Group PICU trigger tool.
Setting:
A multidisciplinary 20 bed PICU at the Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital in Cape Town.
Patients:
The retrospective section of the study involved 80 randomly selected patients who had been discharged from the PICU, and the prospective study involved patients who were present in the PICU between March and June 2012.
Interventions:
None.
Measurements And Main Results:
The retrospective audit identified 260 adverse events in 61 patients (50.8 per 100 patient days). Nineteen patients (24%) did not have any adverse events. Catheter complications, hypoglycemia, and endotracheal tube malpositioning requiring repositioning were most frequent. Prospective registration during 58 ward rounds revealed 272 adverse events in 236 patients (27.2 per 100 patient days), particularly catheter complications, nosocomial infection, and surgical complications. Hundred thirty-two patients of the total 236 patients (56%) did not experience an adverse event. Patients experiencing adverse events underwent mechanical ventilation significantly more frequently. Length of stay was significantly associated with number of adverse events.
Conclusions:
The trigger tool method identifies a higher adverse event rate compared with real-time registration. Each method has a unique contribution to yield types of adverse events.
More Related Videos
11:27A Modified Sonographic Algorithm for Image Acquisition in Life-Threatening Emergencies in the Critically Ill Newborn
Published on: April 7, 2023
08:22The Application of Point-of-Care Ultrasonography (POCUS) in the Management of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) in the Intensive Care Unit
Published on: December 12, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Pharmacovigilance
This process, termed pharmacovigilance, aims to detect, evaluate, and minimize harmful effects related to medication use. The data collection for pharmacovigilance depends on spontaneous reporting systems, where healthcare professionals or patients voluntarily report suspected ADRs.
In some cases, there...
Pharmaceutical Poisoning: Potential Scenarios
Endocarditis IV: Nursing Management
Types of Reports II: Incident or Occurrence Report
Purposes:
In the healthcare industry, reports play a crucial role in documenting incidents within an agency. The primary objective of these reports is to ensure patient safety, uphold the...
Guidelines and Strategies for Safe Computer Charting
Maintain Confidentiality and Security:
Healthcare Associated Infections II: Preventive Measures
The best practices for preventing healthcare-associated infections include hand hygiene, patient risk...
