Exploring the experiences of adults with stroke in virtual community-based stroke programs: a qualitative descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Stroke is among the top contributors to disability and can impact an individual's cognition, physical functioning, and mental health. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, several community-based organizations have started delivering stroke programs virtually. However, participants' experiences in these programs remain understudied, and evidence-based guidelines to inform and optimize virtual stroke program development and delivery are lacking. Thus, this study aimed to describe the perspectives and experiences of individuals with stroke who participated in virtual community-based organization stroke programs, including perceived access and participation facilitators and barriers and suggestions for improving these programs. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive design was used to gather participant experiences through semi-structured interviews. Audio-recorded interviews were conducted on Zoom and transcribed verbatim. Adult participants who had experienced a stroke and attended at least one Canadian virtual community-based organization stroke program were recruited. Data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twelve participants (32-69 years, 2-23 years post-stroke, eight women and four men) participated in this study. Five themes were identified: (1) motives to join virtual community-based organization stroke programs, including gaining peer connections, knowledge and information; (2) perceived barriers to accessing and participating in virtual community-based organization stroke programs, including technology inequities, difficulties navigating technology, and inadequate facilitation; (3) perceived facilitators to accessing and participating in virtual community-based organization stroke programs, including remote access, virtual platform features and program leader characteristics/skills; (4) unmet needs during virtual community-based organization stroke programs, including in-person connection and individualized support; and (5) suggestions and preferences for improving virtual community-based organization stroke programs, including program facilitation, content and format. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings highlight opportunities to improve virtual community-based organization stroke programs to optimize participant experiences and outcomes. Addressing the barriers and suggestions identified in this study may improve virtual community-based organization stroke programs' access and quality.

Creating a Learning Health System for Improving Diagnostic Safety: Pragmatic Insights from US Health Care Organizations.

OBJECTIVE: To identify challenges and pragmatic strategies for improving diagnostic safety at an organizational level using concepts from learning health systems METHODS: We interviewed 32 safety leaders across the USA on how their organizations approach diagnostic safety. Participants were recruited through email and represented geographically diverse academic and non-academic settings. The interview included questions on culture of reporting and learning from diagnostic errors; data gathering and analysis activities; diagnostic training and educational activities; and engagement of clinical leadership, staff, patients, and families in diagnostic safety activities. We conducted an inductive content analysis of interview transcripts and two reviewers coded all data. RESULTS: Of 32 participants, 12 reported having a specific program to address diagnostic errors. Multiple barriers to implement diagnostic safety activities emerged: serious concerns about psychological safety associated with diagnostic error; lack of infrastructure for measurement, monitoring, and improvement activities related to diagnosis; lack of leadership investment, which was often diverted to competing priorities related to publicly reported measures or other incentives; and lack of dedicated teams to work on diagnostic safety. Participants provided several strategies to overcome barriers including adapting trigger tools to identify safety events, engaging patients in diagnostic safety, and appointing dedicated diagnostic safety champions. CONCLUSIONS: Several foundational building blocks related to learning health systems could inform organizational efforts to reduce diagnostic error. Promoting an organizational culture specific to diagnostic safety, using science and informatics to improve measurement and analysis, leadership incentives to build institutional capacity to address diagnostic errors, and patient engagement in diagnostic safety activities can enable progress.

Measure Dx: Implementing pathways to discover and learn from diagnostic errors.

Despite the high frequency of diagnostic errors, multiple barriers, including measurement, make it difficult learn from these events. This article discusses Measure Dx, a new resource from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality that translates knowledge from diagnostic safety measurement research into actionable recommendations. Measure Dx guides healthcare organizations to detect, analyze, and learn from diagnostic safety events as part of a continuous learning and feedback cycle. Wider adoption of Measure Dx, along with the implementation of solutions that result, can advance new frontiers in reducing preventable diagnostic harm to patients.

Patient and Physician Perspectives of Deprescribing Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Older Adults with a History of Falls: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: High-risk medications pose serious safety risks to older adults, including increasing the risk of falls. Deprescribing potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in older adults who have experienced a fall is a key element of fall reduction strategies. However, continued use of PIMs in older adults is common, and clinicians may face substantial deprescribing barriers. OBJECTIVE: Explore patient and clinician experiences with and perceptions of deprescribing PIMs in patients with a history of falls. DESIGN: We led guided patient feedback sessions to explore deprescribing scenarios with patient stakeholders and conducted semi-structured interviews with primary care physicians (PCPs) to explore knowledge and awareness of fall risk guidelines, deprescribing experiences, and barriers and facilitators to deprescribing. PARTICIPANTS: PCPs from Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) and patient members of the KPSC Regional Patient Advisory Committee. APPROACH: We used maximum variation sampling to identify PCPs with patients who had a fall, then categorized the resulting PIM dispense distribution for those patients into high and low frequency. We analyzed the data using a hybrid deductive-inductive approach. Coders applied initial deductively derived codes to the data, simultaneously using an open-code inductive approach to capture emergent themes. KEY RESULTS: Physicians perceived deprescribing discussions as potentially contentious, even among patients with falls. Physicians reported varying comfort levels with deprescribing strategies: some felt that the conversations might be better suited to others (e.g., pharmacists), while others had well-planned negotiation strategies. Patients reported lack of clarity as to the reasons and goals of deprescribing and poor understanding of the seriousness of falls. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that key barriers to deprescribing include PCP trepidation about raising a contentious topic and insufficient patient awareness of the potential seriousness of falls. Findings suggest the need for multifaceted, multilevel deprescribing approaches with clinician training strategies, patient educational resources, and a focus on building trusting patient-clinician relationships.

Current state of fall prevention and management policies and procedures in Canadian spinal cord injury rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: Preventing patient falls is a priority in tertiary spinal cord injury (SCI) rehabilitation. Falls can result in patient or staff injury, delayed rehabilitation, and hospital liability. A comprehensive overview of fall prevention/management policies and procedures in Canadian SCI rehabilitation is currently lacking. We describe and compare the fall prevention/management policies and procedures implemented in Canadian tertiary hospitals that provide SCI rehabilitation. METHODS: Fall prevention/management documents implemented in SCI rehabilitation at six Canadian tertiary rehabilitation hospitals across five provinces were analyzed using a document analysis. Analysis involved multiple readings of the documents followed by a content and thematic document analysis. RESULTS: Fall prevention/management policies and procedures in SCI rehabilitation were organized into three main categories: 1) pre-fall policies and procedures; 2) post-fall policies and procedures; and, 3) communication between and amongst staff, patients, and families. Pre-fall policies and procedures encompassed: a) the definition of a fall; b) fall risk assessments in SCI rehabilitation; and, c) fall prevention strategies. The post-fall policies and procedures included: a) recovery from a fall; b) incident reporting process; and, c) fall classification. Components of fall prevention/management policies and practices that differed between hospitals included the fall risk assessments, post-fall huddles, and fall classifications. CONCLUSIONS: Fall prevention/management is a required organizational practice for all hospitals. Although Canadian tertiary hospitals that provide SCI rehabilitation have similar components of fall prevention/management policies and procedures, the specific requirements differ at each site. There is a need for evidence-informed, consensus-driven implementation of SCI-specific fall prevention and management procedures across Canadian SCI rehabilitation settings.

The design and conduct of Project RedDE: A cluster-randomized trial to reduce diagnostic errors in pediatric primary care.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic errors contribute to the large burden of healthcare-associated harm experienced by children. Primary care settings involve high diagnostic uncertainty and limited time and information, creating ideal conditions for diagnostic errors. We report on the design and conduct of Project RedDE, a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized controlled trial of a virtual quality improvement collaborative aimed at reducing diagnostic errors in pediatric primary care. METHODS: Project RedDE cluster-randomized pediatric primary care practices into one of three groups. Each group participated in a quality improvement collaborative targeting the same three diagnostic errors (missed diagnoses of elevated blood pressure and adolescent depression and delayed diagnoses of abnormal laboratory studies), but in a different sequence. During the quality improvement collaborative, practices worked both independently and collaboratively, leveraging general quality improvement strategies (e.g. process mapping) in addition to error-specific content (e.g. pocket guides for blood pressure norms) delivered during the intervention phase for each error. The quality improvement collaborative intervention included interactive learning sessions and webinars, quality improvement coaching at the team level, and repeated evaluation of failures via root cause analyses. Pragmatic data were collected monthly, submitted to a centralized data aggregator, and returned to the practices in the form of run charts comparing each practice's progress over time to that of the group. The primary analysis used patients as the unit of analysis and compared diagnostic error proportions between the intervention and baseline periods, while secondary analyses evaluated the sustainability of observed reductions in diagnostic errors after the intervention period ended. RESULTS: A total of 43 practices were recruited and randomized into Project RedDE. Eleven practices withdrew before submitting any data, and one practice merged with another participating practice, leaving 31 practices that began work on Project RedDE. All but one of the diverse, national pediatric primary care practices that participated ultimately submitted complete data. Quality improvement collaborative participation was robust, with an average of 63% of practices present on quality improvement collaborative webinars and 85% of practices present for quality improvement collaborative learning sessions. Complete data included 30 months of outcome data for the first diagnostic error worked on, 24 months of outcome data for the second, and 16 months of data for the third. LESSONS LEARNED AND LIMITATIONS: Contamination across study groups was a recurring concern; concerted efforts were made to mitigate this risk. Electronic health records played a large role in teams' success. CONCLUSION: Project RedDE, a virtual quality improvement collaborative aimed at reducing diagnostic errors in pediatric primary care, successfully recruited and retained a diverse, national group of pediatric primary care practices. The stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized controlled trial design allowed for enhanced scientific efficiency.

Tracking Progress in Improving Diagnosis: A Framework for Defining Undesirable Diagnostic Events.

Diagnostic error is a prevalent, harmful, and costly phenomenon. Multiple national health care and governmental organizations have recently identified the need to improve diagnostic safety as a high priority. A major barrier, however, is the lack of standardized, reliable methods for measuring diagnostic safety. Given the absence of reliable and valid measures for diagnostic errors, we need methods to help establish some type of baseline diagnostic performance across health systems, as well as to enable researchers and health systems to determine the impact of interventions for improving the diagnostic process. Multiple approaches have been suggested but none widely adopted. We propose a new framework for identifying "undesirable diagnostic events" (UDEs) that health systems, professional organizations, and researchers could further define and develop to enable standardized measurement and reporting related to diagnostic safety. We propose an outline for UDEs that identifies both conditions prone to diagnostic error and the contexts of care in which these errors are likely to occur. Refinement and adoption of this framework across health systems can facilitate standardized measurement and reporting of diagnostic safety.

Using voluntary reports from physicians to learn from diagnostic errors in emergency medicine.

OBJECTIVES: Diagnostic errors are common in the emergency department (ED), but few studies have comprehensively evaluated their types and origins. We analysed incidents reported by ED physicians to determine disease conditions, contributory factors and patient harm associated with ED-related diagnostic errors. METHODS: Between 1 March 2009 and 31 December 2013, ED physicians reported 509 incidents using a department-specific voluntary incident-reporting system that we implemented at two large academic hospital-affiliated EDs. For this study, we analysed 209 incidents related to diagnosis. A quality assurance team led by an ED physician champion reviewed each incident and interviewed physicians when necessary to confirm the presence/absence of diagnostic error and to determine the contributory factors. We generated descriptive statistics quantifying disease conditions involved, contributory factors and patient harm from errors. RESULTS: Among the 209 incidents, we identified 214 diagnostic errors associated with 65 unique diseases/conditions, including sepsis (9.6%), acute coronary syndrome (9.1%), fractures (8.6%) and vascular injuries (8.6%). Contributory factors included cognitive (n=317), system related (n=192) and non-remedial (n=106). Cognitive factors included faulty information verification (41.3%) and faulty information processing (30.6%) whereas system factors included high workload (34.4%) and inefficient ED processes (40.1%). Non-remediable factors included atypical presentation (31.3%) and the patients' inability to provide a history (31.3%). Most errors (75%) involved multiple factors. Major harm was associated with 34/209 (16.3%) of reported incidents. CONCLUSIONS: Most diagnostic errors in ED appeared to relate to common disease conditions. While sustaining diagnostic error reporting programmes might be challenging, our analysis reveals the potential value of such systems in identifying targets for improving patient safety in the ED.

An electronic trigger to detect telemedicine-related diagnostic errors.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic advanced the use of telehealth-facilitated care. However, little is known about how to measure safety of clinical diagnosis made through telehealth-facilitated primary care. METHODS: We used the seven-step Safer Dx Trigger Tool framework to develop an electronic trigger (e-trigger) tool to identify potential missed opportunities for more timely diagnosis during primary care telehealth visits at a large Department of Veterans Affairs facility. We then applied the e-trigger algorithm to electronic health record data related to primary care visits during a 1-year period (1 April 2020-31 March 2021). The algorithm identified patients with unexpected visits within 10 days of an index telemedicine visit and classified such records as e-trigger positive. We then validated the e-trigger's ability to detect missed opportunities in diagnosis using chart reviews based on a structured data collection instrument (the Revised Safer Dx instrument). RESULTS: We identified 128,761 telehealth visits (32,459 unique patients), of which 434 visits led to subsequent unplanned emergency department (ED), hospital, or primary care visits within 10 days of the index visit. Of these, 116 were excluded for clinical reasons (trauma, injury, or childbirth), leaving 318 visits (240 unique patients) needing further evaluation. From these, 100 records were randomly selected for review, of which four were falsely flagged due to invalid data (visits by non-providers or those incorrectly flagged as completed telehealth visits). Eleven patients had a missed opportunity in diagnosis, yielding a positive predictive value of 11%. DISCUSSION: Electronic triggers that identify missed opportunities for additional evaluation could help advance the understanding of safety of clinical diagnosis made in telehealth-enabled care. Better measurement can help determine which patients can safely be cared for via telemedicine versus traditional in-person visits.

Patient generated research priorities to improve diagnostic safety: A systematic prioritization exercise.

BACKGROUND: Most people experience a diagnostic error at least once in their lifetime. Patients' experiences with their diagnosis could provide important insights when setting research priorities to reduce diagnostic error. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to engage patients in research agenda setting for improving diagnosis. PATIENT INVOLVEMENT: Patients were involved in generating, discussing, prioritizing, and ranking of research questions for diagnostic error reduction. METHODS: We used the prioritization methodology based on the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI). We first solicited research questions important for diagnostic error reduction from a large group of patients. Thirty questions were initially prioritized at an in-person meeting with 8 patients who were supported by 4 researchers. The resulting list was further prioritized by patients who scored questions on five predefined criteria. We then applied previously determined weights to these prioritization criteria to adjust the final prioritization score for each question, resulting in 10 highest priority research questions. RESULTS: Forty-one patients submitted 171 research questions. After prioritization, the highest priority topics included better care coordination across the diagnostic continuum and improving care transitions, improved identification and measurement of diagnostic errors and attention for implicit bias towards patients who are vulnerable to diagnostic errors. DISCUSSION: We systematically identified the top-10 patient generated research priorities for diagnostic error reduction using transparent and objective methods. Patients prioritized different research questions than researchers and therefore complemented an agenda previously generated by researchers. PRACTICAL VALUE: Research priorities identified by patients can be used by funders and researchers to conduct future research focused on reducing diagnostic errors. FUNDING: This project was funded by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.

Understanding the Goals of Older Adults with Complex Care Needs, Their Family Caregivers and Their Care Providers Enrolled in a Patient Navigation Program.

Patient navigation models of care are being used to support hospital-to-home transitions. The present paper aimed to explore the goals important to older adults, their caregivers, and care providers as they transition from hospital-to-home and how, if at all, patient navigation can enable goals of care. Data were comprised of 94 interviews with 16 older adults, 5 family caregivers and 48 healthcare providers. Data were analyzed thematically and similarities and differences in goals were identified. Shared goals included having someone to count on and easy access to services. Older adults expressed the goal of independence, whereas family caregivers and healthcare providers noted safety. Caregivers noted goals of developing skills. While patient navigation was viewed as meeting goals of care by participants, future research is required to determine how patient navigation can support goal setting as a standard clinical practice and the long-term patient outcomes of meeting goals.

Community-Based Culturally Tailored Education Programs for Black Communities with Cardiovascular Disease, Diabetes, Hypertension, and Stroke: Systematic Review Findings.

BACKGROUND: Community-based culturally tailored education (CBCTE) programs for chronic diseases may reduce health disparities; however, a synthesis across chronic diseases is lacking. We explored (1) the characteristics and outcomes of CBCTE programs and (2) which strategies for culturally appropriate interventions have been used in CBCTE programs, and how they have been implemented. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by searching three databases to identify empirical full-text literature on CBCTE programs for Black communities with cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, or stroke. Studies were screened in duplicate, then data regarding study characteristics, participants, intervention, and outcomes were extracted and analyzed. Cultural tailoring strategies within programs were categorized using Kreuter and colleagues' framework. RESULTS: Of the 74 studies, most were conducted in the USA (97%) and delivered in one site (53%; e.g., church/home). CBCTE programs targeted diabetes (65%), hypertension (30%), diabetes and hypertension (1%), cardiovascular disease (3%), and stroke (1%). Reported program benefits included physiological, medication-related, physical activity, and literacy. Cultural tailoring strategies included peripheral (targeted Black communities), constituent-involving (e.g., community informed), evidential (e.g., integrated community resources), linguistic (e.g., delivered in community's dialect/accent), and sociocultural (e.g., integrated community members' religious practices). CONCLUSIONS: CBCTE programs may have beneficial outcomes, but a small sample size limited several. The strategies identified can be adopted by programs seeking to culturally tailor. Future interventions should clearly describe community members' roles/involvement and deliver programs in multiple locations to broaden reach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021245772.

Blood test result communication in primary care: mixed-methods systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: After testing, ensuring test results are communicated and actioned is important for patient safety, with failure or delay in diagnosis the most common cause of malpractice claims in primary care worldwide. Identifying interventions to improve test communication from the decision to test through to sharing of results has important implications for patient safety, GP workload, and patient engagement. AIM: To assess the factors around communication of blood test results between primary care providers (for example GPs, nurses, reception staff) and their patients and carers. DESIGN & SETTING: A mixed methods systematic review including primary studies involving communication of blood test results in primary care. METHOD: The review will use a segregated convergent synthesis method. Qualitative information will be synthesised using a meta-aggregative approach, and quantitative data will be meta-analysed or synthesised if pooling of studies is appropriate and data are available. If not, data will be presented in tabular and descriptive summary form. CONCLUSION: This review has the potential to provide conclusions about blood test result communication interventions and factors important to stakeholders, including barriers and facilitators to improved communication.

Agreement between patient's description of abdominal symptoms of possible upper gastrointestinal cancer and general practitioner consultation notes: a qualitative analysis of video-recorded UK primary care consultation data.

INTRODUCTION: Abdominal symptoms are common in primary care but infrequently might be due to an upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer. Patients' descriptions may differ from medical terminology used by general practitioners (GPs). This may affect how information about abdominal symptoms possibly due to an UGI cancer are documented, creating potential missed opportunities for timely investigation. OBJECTIVES: To explore how abdominal symptoms are communicated during primary care consultations, and identify characteristics of patients' descriptions that underpin variation in the accuracy and completeness with which they are documented in medical records. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Primary care consultation video recordings, transcripts and medical records from an existing dataset were screened for adults reporting abdominal symptoms. We conducted a qualitative content analysis to capture alignments (medical record entries matching patient verbal and non-verbal descriptions) and misalignments (symptom information omitted or differing from patient descriptions). Categories were informed by the Calgary-Cambridge guide's 'gathering information' domains and patterns in descriptions explored. RESULTS: Our sample included 28 consultations (28 patients with 18 GPs): 10 categories of different clinical features of abdominal symptoms were discussed. The information GPs documented about these features commonly did not match what patients described, with misalignments more common than alignments (67 vs 43 instances, respectively). Misalignments often featured patients using vague descriptors, figurative speech, lengthy explanations and broad hand gestures. Alignments were characterised by patients using well-defined terms, succinct descriptions and precise gestures for symptoms with an exact location. Abdominal sensations reported as 'pain' were almost always documented compared with expressions of 'discomfort'. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominal symptoms that are well defined or communicated as 'pain' may be more salient to GPs than those expressed vaguely or as 'discomfort'. Variable documentation of abdominal symptoms in medical records may have implications for the development of clinical decision support systems and decisions to investigate possible UGI cancer.

Types of diagnostic errors reported by paediatric emergency providers in a global paediatric emergency care research network.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic errors, reframed as missed opportunities for improving diagnosis (MOIDs), are poorly understood in the paediatric emergency department (ED) setting. We investigated the clinical experience, harm and contributing factors related to MOIDs reported by physicians working in paediatric EDs. METHODS: We developed a web-based survey in which physicians participating in the international Paediatric Emergency Research Network representing five out of six WHO regions, described examples of MOIDs involving their own or a colleague's patients. Respondents provided case summaries and answered questions regarding harm and factors contributing to the event. RESULTS: Of 1594 physicians surveyed, 412 (25.8%) responded (mean age=43 years (SD=9.2), 42.0% female, mean years in practice=12 (SD=9.0)). Patient presentations involving MOIDs had common undifferentiated symptoms at initial presentation, including abdominal pain (21.1%), fever (17.2%) and vomiting (16.5%). Patients were discharged from the ED with commonly reported diagnoses, including acute gastroenteritis (16.7%), viral syndrome (10.2%) and constipation (7.0%). Most reported MOIDs (65%) were detected on ED return visits (46% within 24 hours and 76% within 72 hours). The most common reported MOID was appendicitis (11.4%), followed by brain tumour (4.4%), meningitis (4.4%) and non-accidental trauma (4.1%). More than half (59.1%) of the reported MOIDs involved the patient/parent-provider encounter (eg, misinterpreted/ignored history or an incomplete/inadequate physical examination). Types of MOIDs and contributing factors did not differ significantly between countries. More than half of patients had either moderate (48.7%) or major (10%) harm due to the MOID. CONCLUSIONS: An international cohort of paediatric ED physicians reported several MOIDs, often in children who presented to the ED with common undifferentiated symptoms. Many of these were related to patient/parent-provider interaction factors such as suboptimal history and physical examination. Physicians' personal experiences offer an underexplored source for investigating and mitigating diagnostic errors in the paediatric ED.