Errores en radiología: nueva clasificación / Errors in Radiology: A New Classificatio

RESUMEN

Objetivo: Proponer una clasificación de los errores en radiología que abarque tipos de errores no descritos previamente. Materiales y métodos: Desde 2004 nuestro Departamento se reúne mensualmente para revisar los errores detectados, aprender de ellos y tratar de evitarlos. Para ello se ha utilizado la clasificación de Smith (1967), pero es insuficiente, ya que se detectan errores que no corresponden a ninguna de las categorías descritas. En este trabajo se revisan 320 errores detectados en nuestro Departamento y se diseña una nueva clasificación basada en los pasos del trabajo radiológico, con seis categorías errores cometidos durante la obtención de la imagen, durante la observación, durante la integración psíquica, durante el análisis racional, durante la redacción y la entrega del informe radiológico y durante la planeación y realización de procedimientos. Resultados: La distribución de los errores así clasificados fue 20 (6,25 %) en la obtención de la imagen; 100 (31,25 %) durante la observación; 39 (12,25 %) en la integración psíquica; 48 (15 %) en el análisis racional; 93 (29 %) en la redacción y entrega del informe y 20 (6,25 %) en la realización de procedimientos. Todos los errores recopilados fueron clasificados. Conclusiones: La nueva clasificación es amplia y suficiente para la clasificación de los errores. En ella se incluyen nuevas categorías de errores que no podían ser incluidos en clasificaciones previamente publicadas. Al estar basada en los pasos que sigue el radiólogo cuando se enfrenta a una imagen, puede ser vigente en el tiempo. Sirve para tomar medidas preventivas

ABSTRACT

Objective: To propose a new classification of errors in radiology, covering types of errors which have not been previously described. Materials and methods: Since 2004, our department meets monthly in order to review the errors detected in our practice. These errors are analyzed to learn from them and to try to avoid them in the future. The classification described by Smith in 1967 has been used. However, this classification is insufficient, given that errors are detected that do not correspond to any of the described categories. In this work, 320 errors are reviewed which have been detected in our Department, and a new classification is designed based on the steps of radiological work in six categories Mistakes made during the obtainment of the image, mistakes made during the observation, mistakes made during the psychic integration, mistakes made during the rational analysis, mistakes made during the drafting of the report and mistakes made during interventional procedures. Results: 20 (6,25%) mistakes were made during the obtainment of the image; 100 (31,25%), mistakes were made during the observation, 39 (12,25%) mistakes were made during the psychic integration, 48 (15%) mistakes were made during the rational analysis, 93 (29%) mistakes were made during the drafting of the report and 20 (6,25%) mistakes were made during interventional procedures. All errors have a category in this new classification. Conclusions: The new classification is ample and sufficient for the classification of errors. New categories of errors that could not be included in previously published classifications are included in it. Given that it is based on the steps that the radiologist follows when facing an image, it may be applicable in time. It is useful to take preventive measures.