MR- safety : Evaluation of compliance with screening routines using a structured screening interview
Hansson, Boel LU ; Simic, Matea ; Olsrud, Johan LU ; Markenroth Bloch, Karin LU
; Owman, Titti
LU
; Sundgren, Pia C.
LU
and Björkman-Burtscher, Isabella M.
LU
(2022)
In Journal of Patient Safety and Risk Management
27(2).
p.76-82
- Abstract
Background: Magnetic resonance (MR) safety procedures are designed to allow patients, research subjects and personnel to enter the MR-scanner room under controlled conditions and without the risk to be harmed during the examination. Ferromagnetic objects in the MR-environment or inside the human body represent the main safety risks potentially leading to human injuries. Screening for MR-safety risks with dedicated procedures is therefore mandatory. As human errors during the screening procedure might align and lead to an incident compliance is essential. Purpose: To evaluate compliance with a documented structured MR-safety screening process. Method: Written and signed MR-safety screening documentation collected at a national 7T MR... (More)
Background: Magnetic resonance (MR) safety procedures are designed to allow patients, research subjects and personnel to enter the MR-scanner room under controlled conditions and without the risk to be harmed during the examination. Ferromagnetic objects in the MR-environment or inside the human body represent the main safety risks potentially leading to human injuries. Screening for MR-safety risks with dedicated procedures is therefore mandatory. As human errors during the screening procedure might align and lead to an incident compliance is essential. Purpose: To evaluate compliance with a documented structured MR-safety screening process. Method: Written and signed MR-safety screening documentation collected at a national 7T MR facility during a four-year period was evaluated for compliance of trained personnel with multi-step MR-safety routines. We analysed whether examinations were performed or why they were not performed. Data analysis further included descriptive statistics of the study population (age, gender and patient or healthy volunteer status), identification of missing documents and omitted or incorrect answers, and whether these compliance shortcomings concerned predominantly administrative or MR-safety related issues. Results: Documentation of the screening process in 1819 subjects was incomplete in 19% of subjects. The most common documentation shortcoming was omitted fields. Out of 478 omitted answer-fields in 307 subjects, 36% were of administrative nature and 64% related directly to MR-safety issues. Conclusion: Compliance with MR-safety screening procedures cannot be taken for granted and deficiencies to comply with screening routines were revealed. Documentation shortcomings concerned both administrative and MR-safety related issues.
(Less)
- author
- Hansson, Boel
LU
; Simic, Matea
; Olsrud, Johan
LU
; Markenroth Bloch, Karin
LU
; Owman, Titti
LU
; Sundgren, Pia C.
LU
and Björkman-Burtscher, Isabella M.
LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2022-04
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- documentation [L01.453.245], magnetic resonance imaging [E01.370.350.825.500], patient safety [N06.850.135.060.075.399], Safety management [N04.452.871.900]
- in
- Journal of Patient Safety and Risk Management
- volume
- 27
- issue
- 2
- pages
- 7 pages
- publisher
- SAGE Publications
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85129567847
- ISSN
- 2516-0435
- DOI
- 10.1177/25160435221077493
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- f3a27734-6c9d-4a77-b007-ec970249030b
- date added to LUP
- 2022-07-07 14:01:38
- date last changed
- 2022-07-08 02:31:04
@article{f3a27734-6c9d-4a77-b007-ec970249030b,
abstract = {{<p>Background: Magnetic resonance (MR) safety procedures are designed to allow patients, research subjects and personnel to enter the MR-scanner room under controlled conditions and without the risk to be harmed during the examination. Ferromagnetic objects in the MR-environment or inside the human body represent the main safety risks potentially leading to human injuries. Screening for MR-safety risks with dedicated procedures is therefore mandatory. As human errors during the screening procedure might align and lead to an incident compliance is essential. Purpose: To evaluate compliance with a documented structured MR-safety screening process. Method: Written and signed MR-safety screening documentation collected at a national 7T MR facility during a four-year period was evaluated for compliance of trained personnel with multi-step MR-safety routines. We analysed whether examinations were performed or why they were not performed. Data analysis further included descriptive statistics of the study population (age, gender and patient or healthy volunteer status), identification of missing documents and omitted or incorrect answers, and whether these compliance shortcomings concerned predominantly administrative or MR-safety related issues. Results: Documentation of the screening process in 1819 subjects was incomplete in 19% of subjects. The most common documentation shortcoming was omitted fields. Out of 478 omitted answer-fields in 307 subjects, 36% were of administrative nature and 64% related directly to MR-safety issues. Conclusion: Compliance with MR-safety screening procedures cannot be taken for granted and deficiencies to comply with screening routines were revealed. Documentation shortcomings concerned both administrative and MR-safety related issues.</p>}},
author = {{Hansson, Boel and Simic, Matea and Olsrud, Johan and Markenroth Bloch, Karin and Owman, Titti and Sundgren, Pia C. and Björkman-Burtscher, Isabella M.}},
issn = {{2516-0435}},
keywords = {{documentation [L01.453.245]; magnetic resonance imaging [E01.370.350.825.500]; patient safety [N06.850.135.060.075.399]; Safety management [N04.452.871.900]}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{2}},
pages = {{76--82}},
publisher = {{SAGE Publications}},
series = {{Journal of Patient Safety and Risk Management}},
title = {{MR- safety : Evaluation of compliance with screening routines using a structured screening interview}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/25160435221077493}},
doi = {{10.1177/25160435221077493}},
volume = {{27}},
year = {{2022}},
}