Background Despite over a decade of efforts to reduce the adverse event rate in healthcare, the rate has remained relatively unchanged. Root cause analysis (RCA) is a process used by hospitals in an attempt to reduce adverse event rates; however, the outputs of this process have not been well studied in healthcare. This study aimed to examine the types of solutions proposed in RCAs over an 8-year period at a major academic medical institution. Methods All state-reportable adverse events were gathered, and those for which an RCA was performed were analysed. A consensus rating process was used to determine a severity rating for each case. A qualitative approach was used to categorise the types of solutions proposed by the RCA team in each case and descriptive statistics were calculated. Results 302 RCAs were reviewed. The most common event types involved a procedure complication, followed by cardiopulmonary arrest, neurological deficit and retained foreign body. In 106 RCAs, solutions were proposed. A large proportion (38.7%) of RCAs with solutions proposed involved a patient death. Of the 731 proposed solutions, the most common solution types were training (20%), process change (19.6%) and policy reinforcement (15.2%). We found that multiple event types were repeated in the study period, despite repeated RCAs. Conclusions This study found that the most commonly proposed solutions were weaker actions, which were less likely to decrease event recurrence. These findings support recent attempts to improve the RCA process and to develop guidance for the creation of effective and sustainable solutions to be used by RCA teams.
The feature-constraint model provides a method to identify HIT-related patient safety hazards using a method that is applicable across healthcare systems with variability in their PSE report structures.
Background: With the widespread use of electronic health records (EHRs) for many clinical tasks, interoperability with other health information technology (health IT) is critical for the effective delivery of care. While it is generally recognized that poor interoperability negatively impacts patient care, little is known about the specific patient safety implications. Understanding the patient safety implications will help prioritize interoperability efforts around architectures and standards. Objectives: Our objectives were to (1) identify patient safety incident reports that reflect EHR interoperability challenges with other health IT, and (2) perform a detailed analysis of these reports to understand the health IT systems involved, the clinical care processes impacted, whether the incident occurred within or between provider organizations, and the reported severity of the patient safety events. Methods: From a database of 1.735 million patient safety event (PSE) reports spanning multiple provider organizations, 2625 reports that were indicated as being health IT related by the event reporter were reviewed to identify EHR interoperability related reports. Through a rigorous coding process 209 EHR interoperability related events were identified and coded. Results: The majority of EHR interoperability PSE reports involved interfacing with pharmacy systems (i.e. medication related), followed by laboratory, and radiology. Most of the interoperability challenges in these clinical areas were associated with the EHR receiving information from other health IT systems as opposed to the EHR sending information to other systems. The majority of EHR interoperability challenges were within a provider organization and while many of the safety events reached the patient, only a few resulted in patient harm. Conclusions: Interoperability efforts should prioritize systems in pharmacy, laboratory, and radiology. Providers should recognize the need to improve EHRs interfacing with other health IT systems within their own organization.
In this population, initial pain score documentation was common, but severe pain was frequently untreated, most often in the youngest patients. Documentation of a second pain score was not common but was associated with more aggressive pain management when it occurred. Further study is needed to investigate causation and to explore interventions that increase the likelihood of severe pain being treated.
An alternative to conventional models that treat decisions as open-loop independent choices is presented. The alterative model is based on observations of work situations such as healthcare, where decisionmaking is more typically a closed-loop, dynamic, problem-solving process. The article suggests five important distinctions between the processes assumed by conventional models and the reality of decisionmaking in practice. It is suggested that the logic of abduction in the form of an adaptive, muddling through process is more consistent with the realities of practice in domains such as healthcare. The practical implication is that the design goal should not be to improve consistency with normative models of rationality, but to tune the representations guiding the muddling process to increase functional perspicacity.
Background The use of new technology like virtual reality, e-learning, and serious gaming can offer novel, more accessible options that have been demonstrated to improve learning outcomes. Objective The aim of this study was to compare the educational effectiveness of serious game–based simulation training to traditional mannequin-based simulation training and to determine the perceptions of physicians and nurses. We used an obstetric use case, namely electronic fetal monitoring interpretation and decision making, for our assessment. Methods This study utilized a mixed methods approach to evaluate the effectiveness of the new, serious game–based training method and assess participants’ perceptions of the training. Participants were randomized to traditional simulation training in a center with mannequins or serious game training. They then participated in an obstetrical in-situ simulation scenario to assess their learning. Participants also completed a posttraining perceptions questionnaire. Results The primary outcome measure for this study was the participants’ performance in an in-situ mannequin-based simulation scenario, which occurred posttraining following a washout period. No significant statistical differences were detected between the mannequin-based and serious game–based groups in overall performance, although the study was not sufficiently powered to conclude noninferiority. The survey questions were tested for significant differences in participant perceptions of the educational method, but none were found. Qualitative participant feedback revealed important areas for improvement, with a focus on game realism. Conclusions The serious game training tool developed has potential utility in providing education to those without access to large simulation centers; however, further validation is needed to demonstrate if this tool is as effective as mannequin-based simulation.
Objectives: Interruptions and distractions have been shown to be a frequent occurrence across health care and have been linked to negative outcomes that create potential patient safety risks. Although observational studies have catalogued interruption frequency and source, the impact of an interruption is difficult to observe. We analyzed patient safety event (PSE) reports related to interruptions to identify clinical processes reported to be frequently interrupted and the reported outcomes of those interruptions. Methods:We retrospectively analyzed PSE reports entered by frontline staff between January 2013 and January 2016. Of 79,428 total PSEs entered, 220 reports were identified using keyword matching and subsequent manual review as being directly related to a clinical interruption. Categories were developed to identify the cause of the interruption, task being interrupted, and the result of the interruption. Percentages were calculated.Results: Nurses were most often reported to be interrupted in the PSEs (50%). General distractions (43.2%) or high workload (18.6%) were most commonly noted to interrupt the individual's work. The interrupted activity was most often a medication task (50.9%), frequently in the administration phase (24.1%), or the ordering phase (16.8%). The most common medication error was wrong dose administration (14.4% of total medicationrelated errors). Laboratory processes were reported to be disturbed by interruptions in 22.7% of reports, and this frequently resulted in mislabeling of specimens (75% of laboratory-related errors).Conclusions: This retrospective review of PSE reports involving interruptions of clinical activities reveals that interruptions affect a variety of aspects of patient care and can help to guide future work on interruption management.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.