Relative Risk with 95% and 99.8% control limits
X-axis: Expected Events, Y-axis: Relative Risk.
-
Basingstoke & North Hampshire
Observed: 21
Expected: 35.1
Relative Risk: 59.8
-
Buckinghamshire
Observed: 61
Expected: 68.8
Relative Risk: 88.7
-
Heatherwood & Wexham Park
Observed: 29
Expected: 54.1
Relative Risk: 53.6
-
Isle Of Wight
Observed: 11
Expected: 16.3
Relative Risk: 67.4
-
Milton Keynes
Observed: 77
Expected: 38.5
Relative Risk: 200.2
-
Oxford Radcliffe
Observed: 150
Expected: 123.1
Relative Risk: 121.8
-
Portsmouth
Observed: 54
Expected: 92.8
Relative Risk: 58.2
-
Royal Berkshire
Observed: 101
Expected: 69.6
Relative Risk: 145.0
-
Southampton
Observed: 116
Expected: 85.0
Relative Risk: 136.5
-
Winchester & Eastleigh
Observed: 40
Expected: 33.1
Relative Risk: 120.8
Relative Risk with 95% and 99.8% control limits
- Banding:
- Low
- Within expected
- High
Caveat: Due to variations in secondary diagnosis coding it is difficult to know what the true national picture is, as some trusts are better at recording the information than others. The data is presented in this analysis in terms of 'High', 'Low' and 'Within expected' but it should be noted that a Trust labelled as 'High' may not actually have higher rates of incidents but are simply better at recording what happens.
Provider | Observed | Expected | Denominator | Relative Risk | LCL | UCL |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Basingstoke & North Hampshire | 21 | 35.1 | 35639 | 59.8 | 37.0 | 91.4 |
Buckinghamshire | 61 | 68.8 | 64189 | 88.7 | 67.8 | 113.9 |
Heatherwood & Wexham Park | 29 | 54.1 | 55693 | 53.6 | 35.9 | 77.0 |
Isle Of Wight | 11 | 16.3 | 18320 | 67.4 | 33.6 | 120.6 |
Milton Keynes | 77 | 38.5 | 40214 | 200.2 | 158.0 | 250.2 |
Oxford Radcliffe | 150 | 123.1 | 124949 | 121.8 | 103.1 | 143.0 |
Portsmouth | 54 | 92.8 | 96853 | 58.2 | 43.7 | 76.0 |
Royal Berkshire | 101 | 69.6 | 66608 | 145.0 | 118.1 | 176.2 |
Southampton | 116 | 85.0 | 89211 | 136.5 | 112.8 | 163.7 |
Winchester & Eastleigh | 40 | 33.1 | 32164 | 120.8 | 86.3 | 164.5 |
Relative Risk with 95% and 99.8% control limits - SHA data
- Banding:
- Low
- Within expected
- High
SHA | Observed | Expected | Denominator | Relative Risk | LCL | UCL |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
East Midlands | 869 | 674.8 | 675465 | 128.8 | 120.4 | 137.6 |
East Of England | 1289 | 1084.1 | 1036307 | 118.9 | 112.5 | 125.6 |
London | 1441 | 1369.3 | 1474962 | 105.2 | 99.9 | 110.8 |
North East | 789 | 672.1 | 683390 | 117.4 | 109.3 | 125.9 |
North West | 1262 | 1503.3 | 1547135 | 83.9 | 79.4 | 88.7 |
South Central | 660 | 616.4 | 623840 | 107.1 | 99.1 | 115.6 |
South East Coast | 797 | 758.5 | 761196 | 105.1 | 97.9 | 112.6 |
South West | 1666 | 1172.8 | 1121010 | 142.1 | 135.3 | 149.0 |
West Midlands | 742 | 1090.9 | 1108775 | 68.0 | 63.2 | 73.1 |
Yorkshire and The Humber | 823 | 1121.0 | 1144770 | 73.4 | 68.5 | 78.6 |
Measure: Accidental Puncture or Laceration Patient Safety Indicator
- Description:
- The ratio of the observed number of cases of accidental cut, puncture, perforation or laceration to the expected number, per all surgical and medical discharges.
- Definition:
-
Observed: Number of denominator spells with the ICD10 code for a accidental cut, puncture, perforation or laceration in any secondary field across the spell
Expected: The expected number of observed spells
Denominator: All surgical and medical spells in patients aged 19 and over, subject to certain exclusions.
Relative Risk: The observed numerator divided by the expected (multiplied by 100)
LCL: Lower 95% confidence limit
UCL: Upper 95% confidence limit
Banding: High - high number of observed events recorded (lower 95% confidence limit is greater than 100), Low - low number of observed events recorded (upper 95% confidence limit is lower than 100); Within Expected Range - as expected number of events recorded.
- Technical definition
-
Observed: Discharges among cases meeting the inclusion and exclusion rules for the denominator with ICD10 code denoting accidental cut, puncture, perforation or laceration during a procedure in any secondary diagnosis field across the spell. ICD10 Unintentional cut, puncture, perforation or haemorrhage during surgical and medical care:
ICD code Description Y600 During surgical operation Y601 During infusion or transfusion Y602 During kidney dialysis or other perfusion Y603 During injection or immunization Y604 During endoscopic examination Y606 During aspiration, puncture and other catheterization Y605 During heart catheterization Y607 During administration of enema Y608 During other surgical and medical care Y609 During unspecified surgical and medical care T812 Accidental puncture and laceration during a procedure NEC Expected: The expected value for this indicator, calculated using a logistic regression model which adjusts for a variety of case-mix factors:
- Admission method
- Age group (5 year bands)
- Co-morbidities (based on the Charlson Score of the secondary diagnosis codes)
- Deprivation (Carstairs quintile)
- Sex
Denominator: All surgical and medical spells in patients aged 19 and over, defined by specific HRG codes. See Appendix A: Surgical HRGs, See Appendix B: Medical HRGs
Exclude cases
- Primary diagnosis denoting accidental cut, puncture, perforation or laceration
- Pregnancy, childbirth and puerperium: defined by the following HRG codes:
HRG Description N06 Normal Delivery w cc N07 Normal Delivery w/o cc N08 Assisted Delivery w cc N09 Assisted Delivery w/o cc N10 Caesarean Section w cc N11 Caesarean Section w/o cc N12 Antenatal Admissions not Related to Delivery Event M09 Threatened or Spontaneous Abortion M10 Surgical Termination of Pregnancy M11 Medical Termination of Pregnancy - Basis
- NHS Acute (non-specialist) Trusts
- Data sources & Time frame
-
February 2010 - January 2011
Secondary Uses Services (SUS) Commissioning Data set - non frozen SUS extract.
- Data licence acknowledgments
- Secondary Uses Services (SUS) - Hospital Admitted Patients - Copyright: Re-used with the permission of The Health and Social Care Information Centre. All rights reserved.
- Notes
-
Based on AHRQ PSI indicators.
Translated by the Dr Foster Unit at Imperial College in collaboration with the Care Quality Commission (formerly the Healthcare Commission).