EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 54 / No 3 (September 2022) J Extra Corpor Technol, 54 3 (2022) 175-190 References
Free Access
Issue
J Extra Corpor Technol
Volume 54, Number 3, September 2022
Page(s) 175 - 190
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/ject/202254175
Published online 15 September 2022
  1. Green C. Perfusion safety and risk reduction. Presentation at the 6th European conference on perfusion education and training in Stockholm, Sweden. 2006. Available at: https://studyres.com/doc/8027350/quality-in-cardiovascular-perfusion. Accessed March 7, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  2. Jenkins OF, Morris R, Simpson JM. Australasian perfusion incident survey. Perfusion. 1997;12:279–88. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Mejak BL, Stammers A, Rauch E, et al. A retrospective study on perfusion incidents and safety devices. Perfusion. 2000;15:51–61. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Australian and New Zealand College of Perfusionists. Safety Pirs-2. Available at: https://anzcp.org/pirs-ii/. Accessed November 17, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  5. Safety Committee of The Society of Clinical Perfusion Scientists of Great Britain and Ireland and The College of Clinical Perfusion Scientists of Great Britain and Ireland. Safety Committee. Available at: https://www.scps.org.uk/safety/safety-committee. Accessed November 17, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  6. Wilcox T. Perfusion Incident Reporting System (PIRS) November 2014. The Australian and New Zealand College of Perfusionists Gazette. 2014;5–7. [Google Scholar]
  7. Riley JB. Are perfusion technology and perfusionists ready for quality reporting employing six-sigma performance measurement? J Extra Corpor Technol. 2003;35:168–71. [Google Scholar]
  8. Gum A, Sierer S, Topor P. Can voluntary incident reporting increase safety in perfusion? Acad News. 2017;6–13. [Google Scholar]
  9. Riley JB. Classic Pages of the journal of extracorporeal technology. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2007;39:201–9. [Google Scholar]
  10. Matte GS, Riley D, LaPierre R, et al. The Children’s Hospital Boston non-routine event reporting program. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2010;42:158–62. [Google Scholar]
  11. Creswell J. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Los Angeles: Sage; 2014:186–198. [Google Scholar]
  12. Picardi CA, Masick KD. Research Methods: Designing and Conducting Research with a Real-World Focus. Los Angeles: Sage; 2014:140–142. [Google Scholar]
  13. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Learn from defects tool. December 2012. Available at: https://www.ahrq.gov/hai/cusp/toolkit/learn-defects.html. Accessed March 8, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  14. Australian and New Zealand College of Perfusionists. PIRS-2 Incident Report Form. Available at: https://anzcp.org/pirs-ii/pirs-ii-form/. Accessed November 18, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  15. Society of Clinical Perfusion Scientists of Great Britain and Ireland. SCPS Safety Report. Available at: https://www.scps.org.uk/safety/submit-a-report. Accessed November 18, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  16. World Health Organization. Conceptual Framework for the International Classification for Patient Safety, Version 1.1. January 2009. Available at: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjv7uTR5KL0AhUknGoFHc6XCCAQFnoECAUQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.who.int%2Fpatientsafety%2Ftaxonomy%2Ficps_full_report.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3n_IUc6pdMZEYHtDBaTO_u. Accessed November 18, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  17. The Patient Safety Company. Quality and Risk Management Software. Houston, TX. Available at: https://www.patientsafety.com/en/. Accessed November 18, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  18. Risk O. One Platform for Responding to Real-World Challenges. Chicago, IL. Available at: https://www.origamirisk.com. Accessed November 18, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  19. RLDatix. Home Page. North America. Available at: https://www.rldatix.com/en-nam. Accessed November 18, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  20. Puis L, Milojevic M, Boer C, et al. 2019 EACTS/EACTA/EBCP guidelines on cardiopulmonary bypass in adult cardiac surgery. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2020;30:161–202. [Google Scholar]
  21. Svenmarker S, Haggmark S, Jansson E, et al. Quality assurance in clinical perfusion. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1998;14:409–14. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. de Leval MR, Carthey J, Wright DJ, et al. Human factors and cardiac surgery: A multicenter study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2000;119:661–72. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. Wilcox TW, Baker RA. Incident reporting in perfusion: Current perceptions on PIRS-2. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2020;52:7–12. [Google Scholar]
  24. Simmons D, Mick JA, Graves K, et al. 26,000 close call reports: Lessons from the University of Texas close call reporting system. In: Henriksen K, Battles JB, Keyes MA, et al. , eds. Advances in Patient Safety: New Directions and Alternative Approaches, Vol. 1 Assessment. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; August 2008. [Google Scholar]
  25. Svenmarker S, Appelblad M. Reporting of perfusion-related incidents: Pitfalls and limitations. Perfusion. 2005;20:243–8.[CrossRef][10.1191/0267659105pf824oa] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Aberg T, Svenmarker S, Hohner P, et al. Routine registration of deviations from the norm in cardiac surgery: A potent clinical research tool and quality assurance measure. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1997;11:10–6.[CrossRef][10.1016/S1010-7940(96)01000-7] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  27. Wilcox TW. D?ou’ Venons-nous/Que Somes Nous/Ou’ Allons Nous? Accidents Are Inevitable. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2012;44:2–5. [Google Scholar]
  28. Alwardt C, Wilson DS, Pajaro OE. Unexplained obstruction of an integrated cardiotomy filter during cardiopulmonary bypass. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2017;49:59–63. [Google Scholar]
  29. Institute of Medicine. Patient safety: Achieving a new standard for care. November 2003. Available at: https://ncvhs.hhs.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/040305p1.pdf. Accessed March 8, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  30. Gong Y, Kang H, Wu X, et al. Enhancing patient safety event reporting: A systematic review of system design features. Appl Clin Inform. 2017;8:893–909. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. System-focused event investigation and analysis guide. 2017. Available at: https://www.ahrq.gov/patient-safety/capacity/candor/modules/guide4.html. Accessed March 11, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  32. Wahr JA, Prager RL, Abernathy JH, et al. Patient safety in the cardiac operating room: Human factors and teamwork. Circulation. 2013;128:1139–69. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Gritten M. The Gritten report: The independent root cause analysis report into the adverse incident that led to the death of a paediatric cardiac surgery patient at United Bristol Healthcase NHS Trust on 27th May 2005. 2007. Available at: https://assets.websitefiles.com/5da4ad68b9d5374c5a54c71d/5da4ad68b9d537a0a854ca48_SCPS%20-%20Gritten%20Report.pdf. Accessed March 12, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  34. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Patient Safety Organization (PSO) program. No date. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/. Accessed March 12, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  35. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005 Statute and Rule. June 16, 2017. Available at: https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/patient-safety/statute-and-rule/index.html. Accessed November 19, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  36. Hayn C. FISMA assessment and authorization guidance. February 2020. Available at: https://wiki.nci.nih.gov/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=384206461. Accessed May 22, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  37. U.S Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology. SP 800-53A Rev. 5, Assessing Security and Privacy Controls in Information Systems and Organizations. January, 2022. Available at: https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-53a/rev-5/final. Accessed May 22, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  38. U.S. Department of Commerce. Privacy Shield Framework. Self-Certification Information. No date. Available at: https://www.privacyshield.gov/article?id=Self-Certification-Information. Accessed May 22, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  39. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 2017 Trust services criteria for security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy. March, 2020. Available at: https://us.aicpa.org/content/dam/aicpa/interestareas/frc/assuranceadvisoryservices/downloadabledocuments/trust-services-criteria.pdf. Accessed May 22, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  40. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Common Formats Overview. April 2021. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/common-formats/overview. Accessed November 19, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  41. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Become a Patient Safety Organization. August 2021. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/become. Accessed November 19, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  42. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Assess Eligibility to Become a PSO. August 2021. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/become/assess-eligibility. Accessed November 19, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  43. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Select the Prospective PSO Authorized Official (AO). August 2021. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/become/select-authorized-official. Accessed November 19, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  44. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Establish Policies and Procedures for Conducting Patient Safety Activities. August 2021. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/become/establish-policies. Accessed November 19, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  45. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Guides: Guides for PSOs and Providers for Determining Parent Organization and Affiliated Providers. July 2021. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/resources/guides. Accessed November 19, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  46. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Certification for Initial Listing Form. March 2021. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/forms/initial-listing. Accessed November 19, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  47. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Prepare to Submit the Certification for Initial Listing Form. August 2021. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/become/submit-certification. Accessed November 19, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  48. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Listed PSOs. No date. Available at: https://www.pso.ahrq.gov/pso/listed. Accessed April 15, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  49. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Disclosure Statement Form. August 2021. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/forms#disclosure. Accessed November 22, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  50. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The Orrum PSO. April 1, 2021. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/pso/orrum-pso. Accessed November 22, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  51. Pronovost PJ, Morlock LL, Sexton JB, et al. Improving the value of patient safety reporting systems. In: Advances in Patient Safety: New Directions and Alternative Approaches, Vol. 1: Assessment. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; August 2000. [Google Scholar]
  52. Anderson J. Patient Safety Organizations: Improving Safety Through Reporting. Presented at the HCCA Quality of Care Conference. Oct. 11-13, 2009. Available at: file:///C:/Users/CCSFIE∼1/AppData/Local/Temp/GSTues_Anderson-1.pdf. Accessed November 19, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  53. Grist G. Prevent perfusion incidents: An AmSECT risk register. AmSECT Today. 2021;24:16–9. [Google Scholar]
  54. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. NPSD Network of Patient Safety Databases. No date. Available at: https://www.ahrq.gov/npsd/index.html. Accessed November 22, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  55. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. MAUDE–Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience. October 31, 2021. Available at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/search.cfm. Accessed November 22, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  56. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Patient Safety Organization (PSO) Program Frequently Asked Questions. July 2021. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/faq. Accessed November 23, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  57. Ginther R Jr, Fillingham R, Searles B, et al. Departmental use of perfusion crisis management drills: 2002 survey results. Perfusion. 2003;18:299–302. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Australian and New Zealand College of Perfusionists. Safety PIRS-2. No date. Available at: https://anzcp.org/pirs-ii/. Accessed April 28, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  59. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Stories from the field. November 2018. Available at: https://pso.ahrq.gov/with_pso/stories. Accessed April 28, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  60. Kuruz M. Invited commentary: RE: A retrospective survey of monitoring/safety devices and incidents of cardiopulmonary bypass for cardiac surgery in France. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2007;39:158–9. [Google Scholar]
  61. Colligan M. Results of the 2019 survey on perceptions of vacancy and turnover among perfusionists in the United States. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2020;52:27–42. [Google Scholar]
  62. Mort E, Bruckel J, Donelan K, et al. Improving health care quality and patient safety through peer-to-peer assessment: demonstration project in two academic medical centers. Am J Med Qual. 2017;32:472–9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. American Society of Extracorporeal Technology. AmSECT FMEA Archives. No date. Available at: https://www.amsect.org/page/fmea-archives. Accessed May 3, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  64. Fitzgerald D. The “Just Culture” approach to perfusion quality and safety. Presented at: The Annual Cardiothoracic Surgery Symposium; 2018 Sept. 6-9; San Diego, CA. [Google Scholar]
  65. Department of Health. Guide to Good Practice in Clinical Perfusion. 2009. Available at: https://www.actacc.org/node/104. Accessed May 26, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  66. Australian and New Zealand College of Perfusionists. Rules of the Australian and New Zealand College of Perfusionists Incorporated. 2020. Available at: https://anzcp.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/ANZCP-Rules-Final-Approved-201120.pdf. Accessed March 13, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  67. Reagor JA. Focusing on patient and perfusionist safety: Re-visiting the development of a safety reporting system. AmSECT Today. 2020;23:4. [Google Scholar]
  68. van Vuuren W, Shea CE, van der Schaaf TW. The development of an incident analysis tool for the medical field. 1997. Available at: https://pure.tue.nl/ws/files/1370080/493452.pdf. Accessed March 13, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  69. Schabel RK, Berryessa RG, Justison GA, et al. Ten common perfusion problems: Prevention and treatment protocols. J Extra Corpor Technol. 1987;19:392–8. [Google Scholar]
  70. Downing D. Massive air embolism in a Fontan patient. J Extra Corpor Technol. 2011;43:169. [Google Scholar]
  71. Department of Health and Human Services. Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (e-CFR): Part 3–Patient Safety Organizations and Patient Safety Work Product. 2008. Available at: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=42192f8b6c83ddc436beeab06ef0ab90&mc=true&node=pt42.1.3&rgn=div5. Accessed April 15, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  72. Office of Civil Rights. Patient safety and quality improvement act of 2005 statute and rule. June 2017. Available at: https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/patient-safety/statute-and-rule/index.html. Accessed March 12, 2021. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.