Specialty-based, voluntary, anonymous Internet reporting by health care professionals identified a broad range of medical errors in neonatal intensive care and promoted multidisciplinary collaborative learning. Similar specialty-based systems have the potential to enhance patient safety in a variety of clinical settings.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Despite advances in neonatal medicine, infants requiring neonatal intensive care continue to experience substantial morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this initiative was to generate large-scale simultaneous improvements in multiple domains of care in a large neonatal network through a program called the “100,000 Babies Campaign.” METHODS: Key drivers of neonatal morbidity and mortality were identified. A system for retrospective morbidity and mortality review was used to identify problem areas for project prioritization. NICU system analysis and staff surveys were used to facilitate reengineering of NICU systems in 5 key driver areas. Electronic health record–based automated data collection and reporting were used. A quality improvement infrastructure using the Kotter organizational change model was developed to support the program. RESULTS: From 2007 to 2013, data on 422 877 infants, including a subset with birth weight of 501 to 1500 g (n = 58 555) were analyzed. Key driver processes (human milk feeding, medication use, ventilator days, admission temperature) all improved (P < .0001). Mortality, necrotizing enterocolitis, retinopathy of prematurity, bacteremia after 3 days of life, and catheter-associated infection decreased. Survival without significant morbidity (necrotizing enterocolitis, severe intraventricular hemorrhage, severe retinopathy of prematurity, oxygen use at 36 weeks’ gestation) improved. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a multifaceted quality improvement program that incorporated organizational change theory and automated electronic health record–based data collection and reporting program resulted in major simultaneous improvements in key neonatal processes and outcomes.

No abstract

OBJECTIVE. To quantify the potential for misidentification among NICU patients resulting from similarities in patient names or hospital medical record numbers (MRNs). METHODS.A listing of all patients who received care in 1 NICU during 1 calendar year was obtained from the unit's electronic medical record system. A patient day was considered at risk for misidentification when the index patient shared a surname, similar-sounding surname, or similar MRN with another patient who was cared for in the NICU on that day.RESULTS. During the 1-year study period, 12 186 days of patient care were provided to 1260 patients. The unit's average daily census was 33.4; the maximum census was 48. Not a single day was free of risk for patient misidentification. The mean number of patients who were at risk on any given day was 17 (range: 5-35), representing just over 50% of the average daily census. During the entire calendar year, the risk ranged from 20.6% to a high of 72.9% of the average daily census. The most common causes of misidentification risk were similar-appearing MRNs (44% of patient days). Identical surnames were present in 34% of patient days, and similar-sounding names were present in 9.7% of days. Twins and triplets contributed one third of patient days in the NICU. After these multiple births were excluded from analysis, 26.3% of patient days remained at risk for misidentification. Among singletons, the contribution to misidentification risk of similar-sounding surnames was relatively unchanged (9.1% of patient days), whereas that of similar MRNs and identical surnames decreased (17.6% and 1.0%, respectively).CONCLUSIONS. NICU patients are frequently at risk for misidentification errors as a result of similarities in standard identifiers. This risk persists even after exclusion of multiple births and is substantially higher than has been reported in other hospitalized populations.www.pediatrics.org/cgi

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the demographic characteristics and outcomes of neonates who were admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit and treated with inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) during the years 2000-08. The goal of studying this group of neonates was to evaluate how iNO use has evolved in infants and to estimate the frequency of off-label use of this drug in this population.Study Design: Retrospective review of the Pediatrix Clinical Data Warehouse de-identified data set. Pediatrix Medical Group provides intensive care services in 244 hospitals in 32 states and Puerto Rico. Nine (3.7%) centers provide extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.Result: There were 494 255 neonates in the data set; 4316 (0.9%) were treated with iNO. The use of iNO increased from 154 of 32 967 patients in 2000 to 921 of 75 911 patients in 2008; a 2.6-fold increase (0.47 to 1.23%). There were 155 872 infants <34 weeks estimated gestational age discharged between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2008; 1656 (1.1%) were treated with iNO. Since approval in 2000, the reported use of iNO in neonates <34 weeks increased from 0.3 to 1.8% in 2008; a sixfold increase in the reported use of iNO. The biggest increase occurred in infants between 23 and 26 weeks' gestational age (0.8 to 6.6%). In contrast, the increase in iNO use among neonates born X34 weeks has only increased from 0.5 to 1%. Conclusion:The use of iNO has increased and the greatest increase has been the off-label use among preterm neonates. Journal of Perinatology (2010) In a meta-analysis of clinical studies involving term and late preterm neonates, Finer and Barrington 1 concluded that 'based on the evidence presently available, including the neurodevelopmental and general medical outcome information, near-term and term infants with hypoxic respiratory failure unresponsive to other therapy, excluding infants with diaphragmatic hernia, should have a trial of inhaled nitric oxide.' 1 The use of iNO in more premature (<34 weeks) infants has generally focused on two high-risk groups; those with severe acute respiratory distress 2,3 and those at high risk of developing bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). [4][5][6] In a recent meta-analysis of the published clinical studies involving preterm infants, Barrington and Finer 7 concluded that 'y iNO should not be routinely used for preterm infants as a rescue therapy in cases of hypoxic respiratory failure. In contrast, the early routine use of iNO in ventilated preterm infants who are not severely ill, but nevertheless are at risk for serious brain injury or bronchopulmonary dysplasia, holds promise.' 7 The purpose of our study was to determine whether changes in practice are consistent with the suggestions of these two meta-analyses; more specifically, our goal was to evaluate how the off-label use of iNO has changed since its approval in late 1999.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract