PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Knowledge about patient safety in orthodontics is scarce. Lack of standardisation and a common terminology hinders research and limits our understanding of the discipline. This study aims to 1) summarise current knowledge about patient safety incidents (PSI) in orthodontic care by conducting a systematic literature search, 2) propose a new standardisation of PSI terminology and 3) propose a future research agenda on patient safety in the field of orthodontics.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in the main online sources of PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and OpenGrey from their inception to 1 July 2023. Inclusion criteria were based on the World Health Organization´s (WHO) research cycle on patient safety. Studies providing information about the cycle\'s steps related to orthodontics were included. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two of the authors.
RESULTS: A total of 3,923 articles were retrieved. After review of titles and abstracts, 41 articles were selected for full-text review and 25 articles were eligible for inclusion. Seven provided information on the WHO\'s research cycle step 1 (\"measuring harm\"), twenty-one on \"understanding causes\" (step 2) and twelve on \"identifying solutions\" (step 3). No study provided information on Steps 4 and 5 (\"evaluating impact\" or \"translating evidence into safer care\").
CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence on patient safety in orthodontics is scarce due to a lack of standardised reporting and probably also under-reporting of PSIs. Current literature on orthodontic patient safety deals primarily with \"measuring harms\" and \"understanding causes of patient safety\", whereas less attention has been devoted to initiatives \"identifying solutions\", \"evaluating impact\" and \"translating evidence into safer care\". The present project holds a proposal for a new categorisation, terminology and future research agenda that may serve as a framework to support future research and clinical initiatives to improve patient safety in orthodontic care.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO (CRD42022371982).
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in the main online sources of PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and OpenGrey from their inception to 1 July 2023. Inclusion criteria were based on the World Health Organization´s (WHO) research cycle on patient safety. Studies providing information about the cycle\'s steps related to orthodontics were included. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two of the authors.
RESULTS: A total of 3,923 articles were retrieved. After review of titles and abstracts, 41 articles were selected for full-text review and 25 articles were eligible for inclusion. Seven provided information on the WHO\'s research cycle step 1 (\"measuring harm\"), twenty-one on \"understanding causes\" (step 2) and twelve on \"identifying solutions\" (step 3). No study provided information on Steps 4 and 5 (\"evaluating impact\" or \"translating evidence into safer care\").
CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence on patient safety in orthodontics is scarce due to a lack of standardised reporting and probably also under-reporting of PSIs. Current literature on orthodontic patient safety deals primarily with \"measuring harms\" and \"understanding causes of patient safety\", whereas less attention has been devoted to initiatives \"identifying solutions\", \"evaluating impact\" and \"translating evidence into safer care\". The present project holds a proposal for a new categorisation, terminology and future research agenda that may serve as a framework to support future research and clinical initiatives to improve patient safety in orthodontic care.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO (CRD42022371982).
摘要：
背景：关于正畸患者安全的知识很少。缺乏标准化和通用术语阻碍了研究并限制了我们对学科的理解。本研究旨在1）通过进行系统的文献检索，总结有关正畸护理中患者安全事件（PSI）的最新知识，2）提出PSI术语的新标准化，3）提出正畸领域患者安全的未来研究议程。
方法：在PubMed的主要在线资源中进行了系统的文献检索，WebofScience,Scopus和OpenGrey从成立到2023年7月1日。纳入标准基于世界卫生组织（WHO）关于患者安全的研究周期。包括提供与正畸相关的周期步骤信息的研究。研究选择和数据提取由两位作者进行。
结果：共检索到3923篇。在审查标题和摘要后，选择41篇文章进行全文审查，25篇文章符合纳入条件。七人提供了有关世界卫生组织研究周期第1步（“测量危害”）的信息，“了解原因”（步骤2）上有21个，“确定解决方案”（步骤3）上有12个。没有研究提供有关步骤4和5的信息（“评估影响”或“将证据转化为更安全的护理”）。
结论：目前关于正畸患者安全性的证据很少，原因是缺乏标准化报告，也可能是PSI报告不足。当前有关正畸患者安全的文献主要涉及“测量危害”和“了解患者安全的原因”，而对“确定解决方案”的关注较少，“评估影响”和“将证据转化为更安全的护理”。本项目提出了新分类的建议，术语和未来研究议程，可以作为支持未来研究和临床举措的框架，以提高正畸护理中患者的安全性。
背景：PROSPERO（CRD42022371982）。
方法：在PubMed的主要在线资源中进行了系统的文献检索，WebofScience,Scopus和OpenGrey从成立到2023年7月1日。纳入标准基于世界卫生组织（WHO）关于患者安全的研究周期。包括提供与正畸相关的周期步骤信息的研究。研究选择和数据提取由两位作者进行。
结果：共检索到3923篇。在审查标题和摘要后，选择41篇文章进行全文审查，25篇文章符合纳入条件。七人提供了有关世界卫生组织研究周期第1步（“测量危害”）的信息，“了解原因”（步骤2）上有21个，“确定解决方案”（步骤3）上有12个。没有研究提供有关步骤4和5的信息（“评估影响”或“将证据转化为更安全的护理”）。
结论：目前关于正畸患者安全性的证据很少，原因是缺乏标准化报告，也可能是PSI报告不足。当前有关正畸患者安全的文献主要涉及“测量危害”和“了解患者安全的原因”，而对“确定解决方案”的关注较少，“评估影响”和“将证据转化为更安全的护理”。本项目提出了新分类的建议，术语和未来研究议程，可以作为支持未来研究和临床举措的框架，以提高正畸护理中患者的安全性。
背景：PROSPERO（CRD42022371982）。
