Swedish national survey on MR safety compared with CT : a false sense of security?
(2020) In European Radiology 30(4). p.1918-1926- Abstract
Objectives: The objectives were to survey MR safety incidents in Sweden during a 12-month period, to assess severity scores, and to evaluate the confidence of MR personnel in incident-reporting mechanisms. Method: Data were collected within a web-based questionnaire on safety in clinical MR environments with CT for comparison. Data reported MR and CT safety incidents (human injury, material damage, and close calls), incident severity, and confidence of participants in incident-reporting systems. Results: The study population consisted of 529 eligible participants. Participants reported 200 MR and 156 CT safety incidents. Among MR incidents, 16% were given the highest potential severity score. More MR workers (73%) than CT workers (50%)... (More)
Objectives: The objectives were to survey MR safety incidents in Sweden during a 12-month period, to assess severity scores, and to evaluate the confidence of MR personnel in incident-reporting mechanisms. Method: Data were collected within a web-based questionnaire on safety in clinical MR environments with CT for comparison. Data reported MR and CT safety incidents (human injury, material damage, and close calls), incident severity, and confidence of participants in incident-reporting systems. Results: The study population consisted of 529 eligible participants. Participants reported 200 MR and 156 CT safety incidents. Among MR incidents, 16% were given the highest potential severity score. More MR workers (73%) than CT workers (50%) were confident in being aware of any incident occurring at their workplace. However, 69% MR workers (83% for CT) were not aware of reported incidents at their hospitals. Conclusion: Safety incidents resulting in human injury, material damage, and close calls in clinical MR environments do occur. According to national risk assessment recommendations, risk level is high. Results indicated that MR personnel tend to a false sense of security, as a high proportion of staff members were sure that they would have been aware of any incident occurring in their own department, while in reality, incidents did occur without their knowledge. We conclude that false sense of security exists for MR. Key Points: • Safety incidents in clinical MR environments still result in human injury and material damage. • Severity level of MR incidents—assessed using Swedish national risk assessment recommendations—is high. • Confidence of MR personnel in incident-reporting mechanisms is high, but reflects a false sense of security, as a high proportion of staff is unaware of reported incidents in the same workplace.
(Less)
- author
- Hansson, Boel LU ; Olsrud, Johan LU ; Wilén, Jonna ; Owman, Titti LU ; Höglund, Peter LU and Björkman-Burtscher, Isabella M. LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2020-04
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Magnetic resonance imaging, Patient safety, Risk assessment, Safety management, Surveys and questionnaires
- in
- European Radiology
- volume
- 30
- issue
- 4
- pages
- 9 pages
- publisher
- Springer
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85076516044
- pmid:31834506
- ISSN
- 0938-7994
- DOI
- 10.1007/s00330-019-06465-5
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 39e4e024-c61d-413a-904e-47b42653a189
- date added to LUP
- 2020-01-10 12:07:23
- date last changed
- 2024-05-30 09:01:43
@article{39e4e024-c61d-413a-904e-47b42653a189,
abstract = {{<p>Objectives: The objectives were to survey MR safety incidents in Sweden during a 12-month period, to assess severity scores, and to evaluate the confidence of MR personnel in incident-reporting mechanisms. Method: Data were collected within a web-based questionnaire on safety in clinical MR environments with CT for comparison. Data reported MR and CT safety incidents (human injury, material damage, and close calls), incident severity, and confidence of participants in incident-reporting systems. Results: The study population consisted of 529 eligible participants. Participants reported 200 MR and 156 CT safety incidents. Among MR incidents, 16% were given the highest potential severity score. More MR workers (73%) than CT workers (50%) were confident in being aware of any incident occurring at their workplace. However, 69% MR workers (83% for CT) were not aware of reported incidents at their hospitals. Conclusion: Safety incidents resulting in human injury, material damage, and close calls in clinical MR environments do occur. According to national risk assessment recommendations, risk level is high. Results indicated that MR personnel tend to a false sense of security, as a high proportion of staff members were sure that they would have been aware of any incident occurring in their own department, while in reality, incidents did occur without their knowledge. We conclude that false sense of security exists for MR. Key Points: • Safety incidents in clinical MR environments still result in human injury and material damage. • Severity level of MR incidents—assessed using Swedish national risk assessment recommendations—is high. • Confidence of MR personnel in incident-reporting mechanisms is high, but reflects a false sense of security, as a high proportion of staff is unaware of reported incidents in the same workplace.</p>}},
author = {{Hansson, Boel and Olsrud, Johan and Wilén, Jonna and Owman, Titti and Höglund, Peter and Björkman-Burtscher, Isabella M.}},
issn = {{0938-7994}},
keywords = {{Magnetic resonance imaging; Patient safety; Risk assessment; Safety management; Surveys and questionnaires}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{4}},
pages = {{1918--1926}},
publisher = {{Springer}},
series = {{European Radiology}},
title = {{Swedish national survey on MR safety compared with CT : a false sense of security?}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06465-5}},
doi = {{10.1007/s00330-019-06465-5}},
volume = {{30}},
year = {{2020}},
}