Objective To investigate the current status of clinical and research developments in Lanzhou University in China, to provide reference data for establishing a coordinated, multi-sectional, research orientated and internationally competitive program in biomedical sciences. Methods Three types of questionnaire containing 57 items were designed for 8 secondary departments in clinical and basic sciences. Another type of questionnaire was distributed to 200 clinicians, researchers, lecturers, and administrators in both clinical and basic sciences from August to September 2005. We searched SCI, CSCD, CSTPCD, CBM and CNKI for research articles published by Lanzhou University, commercial development of research derived from the University, and general and competitiveness evaluations of the University. In addition, seminars, site visits, and expert interviews were also conducted.Results The response rates for the questionnaires were 100% and 91% respectively. The investigation included the identification and evaluation of research and clinical departments, human resources in the three branches of biomedical sciences (clinical, research and education), including academic title, educational background, age distribution, research area and funding (leading investigators included), and publication records. The numbers of undergraduate and graduate students and their CET-4 score (pass rate) were also analyzed. Based on the information obtained, six secondary databases were established and evaluated..Conclusions The merger of Lanzhou University and Lanzhou Medical College has created an opportunity for further development in biomedical research and clinical science. Facing new challenges and difficulties, we should take this responsibility to work together to make the University a national and international center of clinical, research and education in medical sciences.
Objective To analyze experiences of medical risk management in the United Kingdom so as to explore the possible application for the construction of a Chinese medical risk monitoring and early warning system. Methods We searched Engineering Information, SCI and SSCI, EMBASE, SCOPUS with 100% MEDLINE, VIP, CNKI, and government or official websites. This search was conducted in Jan. 2006. We included articles about medical risk, patient safety and medical errors in the UK. Languages of articles were limited either in English or in Chinese. Results Eleven articles were included, of which 9 article are evidence of level B (about 80%) and the other 2 are evidence of level C (about 20%). The report of “An Organization with a Memory” revealed the severity of medical errors and adverse events in the UK in 2000, and subsequently Minister Blair announced a five-year reform program for NHS. Within 7 years of reform, NHS budget has been increased from £33 billion to £674 billion,(check numbers-doesn’t sound correct) the National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA) and the New National System for learning from adverse events and near misses have been established, a series of practicable measures aimed at ensuring patient safety, preventing medical risk and improving healthcare quality have been implemented, all of which have effectively resolved many problems that perplexed the government and public, such as patients waiting time, range of NHS service, the availability of medical facility and mortality induced by high-risk diseases. Conclusion There are both advantages and disadvantages in the present status of the UK medical risk management. Both of them will provide a guide to prevent medical risk, improve healthcare quality and to realize the ultimate goal that everybody could share healthcare sources fairly and safely in our country.
Objective To evaluate evidence from American medical risk monitoring and precaution system (AMRMPS) which may affect the construction of Chinese medical risk monitoring and precaution system (CMRMPS). Methods We searched relevant databases and Internet resources to identify literature on AMRMPS, medical errors, and patient safety. We used the quality evaluation system for medical risk management literature to extract and evaluate data. Results In 1999, a report from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) not only showed the severity and cause of medical errors in America but also gave the solution of it. In 2000, the Quality Interagency Coordination Task Force (QuIC) was appointed to assess the IOM report and take specific steps to improve AMRMPS. After 5 years, a well-developed medical risk management system was established with the improvement in the public awareness of medical errors, patient safety, performance criteria of medical safety, information technology and error reporting system. There was still some weakness of this system in risk precaution and prevention. Conclusion The experience from AMRMPS can be used to establish the CMRMPS. Firstly, we should disseminate and strengthen the awareness of medical risk and patient safety in public. Secondly, we should establish hospital audit system which includes auditing of medical staff and course of medical risk in continuing and academic education. Thirdly, we should develop regulations and guidelines on health care, medical purchase and drug supply which will benefit in management of regular work. Fourthly, we should develop computer information system for hospital which will regulate the management without the disturbance from human. Lastly, we should emphasize outcome evaluations and strive for perfection during the process.