Critical airway-related incidents and near misses in anaesthesia: a qualitative study of a critical incident reporting system
Study context
- Population
- Anaesthesia providers involved in critical airway-related incidents at a single Swiss centreanaesthesia providers interviewed
- Participants
- 21 providers
- Outcome
- Conceptions of a critical incident reporting system (CIRS) and reasons for underreporting
Methodological detailssingle-centre, semi-structured individual interviews, Framework method analysis, Anaesthesia cases screened for critical airway-related incidents that qualified for critical incident reporting system (CIRS) reporting; involved providers interviewed individually
- Single-centre
- Semi-structured individual interviews
- Framework method analysis
- Anaesthesia cases screened for critical airway-related incidents that qualified for CIRS reporting; involved providers interviewed individually
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Reporting of critical airway incidents to the CIRS
Airway management procedures screened
3668
Cases involving a critical incident
101
2.8%
Critical incidents involving interviewed providers
42 of 101
41.6%
Incidents reported to the CIRS, showing significant underreporting
1
1.0%
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Original publication
Critical airway-related incidents and near misses in anaesthesia: a qualitative study of a critical incident reporting system. Br J Anaesth. Published 12 June 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →