Comparison of computerized surveillance and manual chart review for adverse events

Objective To understand how the source of information affects different adverse event (AE) surveillance methods. Design Retrospective analysis of inpatient adverse drug events (ADEs) and hospital-associated infections (HAIs) detected by either a computerized surveillance system (CSS) or manual chart review (MCR). Measurement Descriptive analysis of events detected using the two methods by type of AE, type of information about the AE, and sources of the information. Results CSS detected more HAIs than MCR (92 % vs 34%); however, a similar number of ADEs was detected by both systems (52 % vs 51%). The agreement between systems was greater for HAIs than ADEs (26 % vs 3%). The CSS missed events that did not have information i