Robert Gibberd
University of Newcastle
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Robert Gibberd.
BMJ | 2000
N Saul Weingart; Ross Wilson; Robert Gibberd; Harrison Bt
Newspaper and television stories of catastrophic injuries occurring at the hands of clinicians spotlight the problem of medical error but provide little insight into its nature or magnitude.1 Clinicians, patients, and policymakers may underestimate the magnitude of risk and the extent of harm. We review the epidemiology of medical error, concentrating primarily on the prevalence and consequences of error, which types are most common, which clinicians make errors, and the risk factors that increase the likelihood of injury from error. #### Summary points The Harvard and Australian studies into medical error remain the only studies that provide population level data on the rates of injuries to patients in hospitals and they identified a substantial amount of medical error In the United States medical error results in 44 000–98 000 unnecessary deaths each year and 1 000 000 excess injuries Errors often occur when clinicians are inexperienced and new procedures are introduced Extremes of age, complex care, urgent care, and a prolonged hospital stay are associated with more errors ### Benchmark studies The Harvard study of medical practice is the benchmark for estimating the extent of medical injuries occurring in hospitals. Brennan et al reviewed the medical charts of 30 121 patients admitted to 51 acute care hospitals in New York statein 1984.2 They reported that adverse events—injuries caused by medical management that prolonged admission or produced disability at the time of discharge—occurred in 3.7% of admissions. A subsequent analysis of the same data found that 69% of injuries were caused by errors.3 In a study of the quality of Australian health care, a population based study modelled on the Harvard study, investigators reviewed the medical records of 14 179 admissions to 28 hospitals in New South Wales and South Australia in 1995.4 An adverse event occurred in 16.6% of admissions, resulting in …
BMJ | 1987
Jill Cockburn; Robert Gibberd; Reid Al; Rob Sanson-Fisher
The contribution of doctor, patient, and consultation interaction patterns to compliance with antibiotic treatment was examined in 233 adult patients seen in general practice. Twelve variables were shown to discriminate between compliers and non-compliers. Discriminating variables relating to patients included health state, employment state, knowledge of tablet, and perception of anxiety level, difficulty in complying, and their observed anger, distance, and assertiveness in the consultation. Discriminating variables relating to doctors included provision of advice on duration of treatment, complexity of dosage schedule, age of doctor, and number of years in practice. For the most part these results confirmed previous research. It is concluded that the doctor should consider both the dosage schedule and the patients daily routine when prescribing antibiotic tablets. Advice on how to take the tablets should be given in specific rather than in general terms. The significant effect of the age of the doctor and the years spent in practice has not been found in previous work. This finding may reflect differences in behavior between younger doctors and their patients. This difference was not detected in the observation of consultation events.
BMJ | 2012
Wilson Rm; P. Michel; S. Olsen; Robert Gibberd; Charles Vincent; R. El-Assady; O. Rasslan; S. Qsous; William Macharia; A. Sahel; S. Whittaker; M. Abdo-Ali; M. Letaief; N. A. Ahmed; A. Abdellatif; I. Larizgoitia
We commend Wilson and colleagues1 for their excellent study providing valuable evidence on the frequency and nature of adverse events in hospitals in transitional economies. Wilson and colleagues d ...Objective To assess the frequency and nature of adverse events to patients in selected hospitals in developing or transitional economies. Design Retrospective medical record review of hospital admissions during 2005 in eight countries. Setting Ministries of Health of Egypt, Jordan, Kenya, Morocco, Tunisia, Sudan, South Africa and Yemen; the World Health Organisation (WHO) Eastern Mediterranean and African Regions (EMRO and AFRO), and WHO Patient Safety. Participants Convenience sample of 26 hospitals from which 15 548 patient records were randomly sampled. Main outcome measures Two stage screening. Initial screening based on 18 explicit criteria. Records that screened positive were then reviewed by a senior physician for determination of adverse event, its preventability, and the resulting disability. Results Of the 15 548 records reviewed, 8.2% showed at least one adverse event, with a range of 2.5% to 18.4% per country. Of these events, 83% were judged to be preventable, while about 30% were associated with death of the patient. About 34% adverse events were from therapeutic errors in relatively non-complex clinical situations. Inadequate training and supervision of clinical staff or the failure to follow policies or protocols contributed to most events. Conclusions Unsafe patient care represents a serious and considerable danger to patients in the hospitals that were studied, and hence should be a high priority public health problem. Many other developing and transitional economies will probably share similar rates of harm and similar contributory factors. The convenience sampling of hospitals might limit the interpretation of results, but the identified adverse event rates show an estimate that should stimulate and facilitate the urgent institution of appropriate remedial action and also to trigger more research. Prevention of these adverse events will be complex and involves improving basic clinical processes and does not simply depend on the provision of more resources.
Quality & Safety in Health Care | 2010
Jeffrey Braithwaite; David Greenfield; Johanna I. Westbrook; Marjorie Pawsey; Mary Westbrook; Robert Gibberd; Justine M. Naylor; Sally Nathan; Maureen Robinson; Bill Runciman; Margaret Jackson; Joanne Travaglia; Brian Johnston; Desmond Yen; Heather McDonald; Lena Low; Sally Redman; Betty Johnson; Angus Corbett; Darlene Hennessy; John Clark; Judie Lancaster
Background Despite the widespread use of accreditation in many countries, and prevailing beliefs that accreditation is associated with variables contributing to clinical care and organisational outcomes, little systematic research has been conducted to examine its validity as a predictor of healthcare performance. Objective To determine whether accreditation performance is associated with self-reported clinical performance and independent ratings of four aspects of organisational performance. Design Independent blinded assessment of these variables in a random, stratified sample of health service organisations. Settings Acute care: large, medium and small health-service organisations in Australia. Study participants Nineteen health service organisations employing 16 448 staff treating 321 289 inpatients and 1 971 087 non-inpatient services annually, representing approximately 5% of the Australian acute care health system. Main measures Correlations of accreditation performance with organisational culture, organisational climate, consumer involvement, leadership and clinical performance. Results Accreditation performance was significantly positively correlated with organisational culture (rho=0.618, p=0.005) and leadership (rho=0.616, p=0.005). There was a trend between accreditation and clinical performance (rho=0.450, p=0.080). Accreditation was unrelated to organisational climate (rho=0.378, p=0.110) and consumer involvement (rho=0.215, p=0.377). Conclusions Accreditation results predict leadership behaviours and cultural characteristics of healthcare organisations but not organisational climate or consumer participation, and a positive trend between accreditation and clinical performance is noted.
Multiple Sclerosis Journal | 2003
Jeannette Lechner-Scott; Ludwig Kappos; Hofman M; C.H. Polman; Ronner H; X. Montalban; Mar Tintoré; M Frontoni; Buttinelli C; Maria Pia Amato; Maria Letizia Bartolozzi; Versavel M; Dahlke F; Kapp Jf; Robert Gibberd
Information from patients who are unable to continue their visits to a study centre may be of major importance for the interpretatio n of results in multiple sclerosis (MS) clinical trials. To validate a questionnaire based on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), patients in five different European centres were assessed independently by pairs of trained EDSS raters, first by telepho ne interview and a few days later by standardized neurological examination. Seventy women and 40 men with an average age of 43.7 years (range 19 -74 years) were included in the study. Mean EDSS score at the last visit was 4.5 (0 -9). EDSS assessment by telepho ne was highly correlated with the EDSS determined by physical examination (Pearson’s correlation coefficient -0.95). A n intraclass correlation coefficient (IC C) of 94.8% was found for the total sample; 77.6% and 86%, respectively, for patients with EDSSB-4.5 (n -46) and \-4.5 (n -64). Kappa values for full agreement were 0.48; for variation by -0.5 steps and -1.0 steps, 0.79 and 0.90, respectively. Best agreement could be found in higher EDSS scores, where assessment by telepho ne interview might be needed most. The telepho ne questionnaire is a valid tool to assess EDSS score in cases where the patient is unable to continue visiting a study centre or in long-term follow-up of trial participants.
BMC Health Services Research | 2006
Jeffrey Braithwaite; Johanna I. Westbrook; Marjorie Pawsey; David Greenfield; Justine M. Naylor; Rick Iedema; Bill Runciman; Sally Redman; Christine Jorm; Maureen Robinson; Sally Nathan; Robert Gibberd
BackgroundAccreditation has become ubiquitous across the international health care landscape. Award of full accreditation status in health care is viewed, as it is in other sectors, as a valid indicator of high quality organisational performance. However, few studies have empirically demonstrated this assertion. The value of accreditation, therefore, remains uncertain, and this persists as a central legitimacy problem for accreditation providers, policymakers and researchers. The question arises as to how best to research the validity, impact and value of accreditation processes in health care. Most health care organisations participate in some sort of accreditation process and thus it is not possible to study its merits using a randomised controlled strategy. Further, tools and processes for accreditation and organisational performance are multifaceted.Methods/designTo understand the relationship between them a multi-method research approach is required which incorporates both quantitative and qualitative data. The generic nature of accreditation standard development and inspection within different sectors enhances the extent to which the findings of in-depth study of accreditation process in one industry can be generalised to other industries. This paper presents a research design which comprises a prospective, multi-method, multi-level, multi-disciplinary approach to assess the validity, impact and value of accreditation.DiscussionThe accreditation program which assesses over 1,000 health services in Australia is used as an exemplar for testing this design. The paper proposes this design as a framework suitable for application to future international research into accreditation. Our aim is to stimulate debate on the role of accreditation and how to research it.
Anz Journal of Surgery | 2005
D. R. McGrath; David C. Leong; Robert Gibberd; Bruce K. Armstrong; Allan D. Spigelman
Background: The evidence for a relationship between patient outcomes and clinician and hospital volume is increasing. The National Colorectal Cancer Care Survey was undertaken to determine the management patterns in Australia for individuals newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer in a 3 month period in the year 2000.
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health | 1997
Paul W. Dickman; Robert Gibberd; Timo Hakulinen
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To examine equity in the health care system with regard to cancer patient care by estimating the level of systematic regional variation in cancer survival in the Nordic countries. Specifically, those cancer sites which exhibit high levels of systematic regional variation in survival and hence inequity were identified. Estimating the reduction in cancer deaths which could be achieved by eliminating this variation so that everyone receives effective care will provide a readily interpretable measure of the amount of systematic regional variation. A comprehensive analysis of regional variation in survival has not previously been conducted so appropriate statistical methodology must be developed. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: All those aged 0-90 years who had been diagnosed with at least one of 12 common malignant neoplasms between 1977 and 1992 in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. DESIGN: A separate analysis was conducted for each country. Regression models for the relative survival ratio were used to estimate the relative risk of excess mortality attributable to cancer in each region after correcting for age and sex. An estimate of the amount of systematic regional variation in survival was obtained by subtracting the estimated expected random variation from the observed regional variation. An estimate was then made of the potential reduction in the number of cancer deaths for 2008-12 if regional variation in survival were eliminated so that everyone received the same level of effective care. MAIN RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2012, an estimated 2.5% of deaths from cancers in the 12 sites studied could be prevented by eliminating regional variation in survival. The percentage of potentially avoidable deaths did not depend on country or sex but it did depend on cancer site. There was no relationship between the level of regional variation in a given country and the level of survival. The cancer sites for which the greatest percentage savings could be achieved were melanoma (11%) and cervix uteri (6%). The sites for which the highest number of deaths could be prevented were prostate, colon, melanoma, and breast. CONCLUSIONS: This methodology showed a small amount of systematic regional variation in cancer survival in the Nordic countries. The cancer sites with high levels of regional variation identified are potential targets for cancer control programmes.
Drug and Alcohol Dependence | 1991
Gloria R. Webb; Selina Redman; Robert Gibberd; Rob Sanson-Fisher
The study aimed to assess the test-retest reliability of two commonly used measures of alcohol consumption, the quantity-frequency (QF) method and the diary method, as well as the stability of scores on the two measures over time. Two methods of assessing reliability and stability were employed. The first was a traditional method based on calculation of correlation coefficients for agreement between scores on repeated measures over a short retest interval to yield test-retest reliability coefficients, and over a long retest interval to yield stability coefficients. The second method was that devised by Wiley and Wiley (1970) to differentiate the effects of reliability and stability on repeated measures over time. The two methods were applied to a sample of heavy drinkers and to a sample of light drinkers. The results indicated that both the QF and diary measures are reliable in measuring alcohol consumption of light drinkers. Both measures are less reliable for heavy drinkers. The results indicate, in addition, that drinking consumption levels of light drinkers demonstrate a high degree of stability. However, the consumption levels of heavy drinkers demonstrate less stability, especially over a long time period. Heavy drinkers significantly reduced reported levels of alcohol consumption on both measures after the first test, suggesting a regression to the mean effect or the possibility of unintended intervention effects due to repeated measurement of drinking behaviour.
International Journal of Cancer | 2006
Xue Qin Yu; Dianne O'Connell; Robert Gibberd; Alan S. Coates; Bruce K. Armstrong
Survival from almost all cancers has improved during the last 30 years. There is debate over the reasons for the improvement. We examined trends in survival for 28 cancers from 1980 to 1996 in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, with adjustment for disease spread at diagnosis. NSW Central Cancer Registry data were used to estimate 5‐year relative survival and relative excess risk of death for patients diagnosed in 1980–84, 1985–88, 1989–92 and 1993–96. Statistical significance of variation in excess deaths between periods of diagnosis was assessed using Poisson regression, with adjustment for age, sex, duration of follow‐up, histology and spread of disease at diagnosis. There were statistically significant falls in excess deaths for 20 of the cancers with a 25% fall for all cancers combined. Cancers of the prostate, liver, thyroid, breast, gallbladder, body of uterus, rectum, cervix and ovary had falls of >30%. The falls varied by spread of disease; the largest being in localised and regionally spread tumours. Overall survival, when unadjusted for spread of cancer, generally fell in parallel with that in the specific categories of spread, which implies that stage migration did not contribute importantly to survival trends. While acknowledging the limitations of incomplete data on stage of cancer at diagnosis, we conclude that falls in excess deaths in NSW from 1980 to 1996 are unlikely, for many cancers, to be attributed to earlier diagnosis or stage migration; thus advances in cancer treatment have almost certainly contributed to them.