Closing the Gap and Raising the Bar: Assessing Board Competency in Quality and Safety.

BACKGROUND: Despite recognition of the important role that governance and executive leaders play in ensuring patient safety and quality, little research has examined leaders' involvement in these areas beyond surveys that assess higher-level knowledge and understanding of patient and workforce safety concepts. METHODS: A survey was sent to a convenience sample of board members and CEOs, as well as unpaired safety and quality leaders (SQLs). The survey included approximately 36 questions asking board members and other non-CEO executives their knowledge, understanding, and board activities related to safety and quality, and SQLs their perceptions of their own boards' knowledge, understanding, and activities related to safety and quality. An analysis of the responses of each of the three groups was conducted to assess baseline ratings, as well as to examine similarities and differences. RESULTS: Overall, similar patterns of self-reported knowledge, understanding, and activities related to safety and quality were evident between the board and CEO groups across virtually all areas examined in this survey, although groups were unpaired. Differences of varying degree were found at the level of individual survey items between board members' and CEOs' responses. SQL ratings were generally lower than the ratings of both board members and CEOs. CONCLUSION: This survey reveals specific areas of focus for improving governance and leadership practices at board meetings, as well as several areas where knowledge and understanding of safety and quality were variable. Further research and consensus would be beneficial to identify best practices for board education and governance activities to drive quality and safety.

Effect of Pharmacist Counseling Intervention on Health Care Utilization Following Hospital Discharge: A Randomized Control Trial.

BACKGROUND: Reduction in 30-day readmission rates following hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is a national goal. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of a tailored, pharmacist-delivered, health literacy intervention on unplanned health care utilization, including hospital readmission or emergency room (ER) visit, following discharge. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial with concealed allocation and blinded outcome assessors SETTING: Two tertiary care academic medical centers PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized with a diagnosis of ACS and/or ADHF. INTERVENTION: Pharmacist-assisted medication reconciliation, inpatient pharmacist counseling, low-literacy adherence aids, and individualized telephone follow-up after discharge MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was time to first unplanned health care event, defined as hospital readmission or an ER visit within 30 days of discharge. Pre-specified analyses were conducted to evaluate the effects of the intervention by academic site, health literacy status (inadequate versus adequate), and cognition (impaired versus not impaired). Adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported. KEY RESULTS: A total of 851 participants enrolled in the study at Vanderbilt University Hospital (VUH) and Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH). The primary analysis showed no statistically significant effect on time to first unplanned hospital readmission or ER visit among patients who received interventions compared to controls (aHR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.78-1.39). There was an interaction of treatment effect by site (p = 0.04 for interaction); VUH aHR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.51-1.15; BWH aHR = 1.44 (95% CI 0.95-2.12). The intervention reduced early unplanned health care utilization among patients with inadequate health literacy (aHR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17-1.00). There was no difference in treatment effect by patient cognition. CONCLUSION: A tailored, pharmacist-delivered health literacy-sensitive intervention did not reduce post-discharge unplanned health care utilization overall. The intervention was effective among patients with inadequate health literacy, suggesting that targeted practice of pharmacist intervention in this population may be advantageous.

Effect of bar-code technology on the safety of medication administration.

BACKGROUND: Serious medication errors are common in hospitals and often occur during order transcription or administration of medication. To help prevent such errors, technology has been developed to verify medications by incorporating bar-code verification technology within an electronic medication-administration system (bar-code eMAR). METHODS: We conducted a before-and-after, quasi-experimental study in an academic medical center that was implementing the bar-code eMAR. We assessed rates of errors in order transcription and medication administration on units before and after implementation of the bar-code eMAR. Errors that involved early or late administration of medications were classified as timing errors and all others as nontiming errors. Two clinicians reviewed the errors to determine their potential to harm patients and classified those that could be harmful as potential adverse drug events. RESULTS: We observed 14,041 medication administrations and reviewed 3082 order transcriptions. Observers noted 776 nontiming errors in medication administration on units that did not use the bar-code eMAR (an 11.5% error rate) versus 495 such errors on units that did use it (a 6.8% error rate)--a 41.4% relative reduction in errors (P<0.001). The rate of potential adverse drug events (other than those associated with timing errors) fell from 3.1% without the use of the bar-code eMAR to 1.6% with its use, representing a 50.8% relative reduction (P<0.001). The rate of timing errors in medication administration fell by 27.3% (P<0.001), but the rate of potential adverse drug events associated with timing errors did not change significantly. Transcription errors occurred at a rate of 6.1% on units that did not use the bar-code eMAR but were completely eliminated on units that did use it. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the bar-code eMAR substantially reduced the rate of errors in order transcription and in medication administration as well as potential adverse drug events, although it did not eliminate such errors. Our data show that the bar-code eMAR is an important intervention to improve medication safety. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00243373.)

An initiative to improve the management of clinically significant test results in a large health care network.

BACKGROUND: The failure of providers to communicate and follow up clinically significant test results (CSTR) is an important threat to patient safety. The Massachusetts Coalition for the Prevention of Medical Errors has endorsed the creation of systems to ensure that results can be received and acknowledged. METHODS: In 2008 a task force was convened that represented clinicians, laboratories, radiology, patient safety, risk management, and information systems in a large health care network with the goals of providing recommendations and a road map for improvement in the management of CSTR and of implementing this improvement plan during the sub-force sequent five years. In drafting its charter, the task broadened the scope from "critical" results to "clinically significant" ones; clinically significant was defined as any result that requires further clinical action to avoid morbidity or mortality, regardless of the urgency of that action. RESULTS: The task force recommended four key areas for improvement--(1) standardization of policies and definitions, (2) robust identification of the patient's care team, (3) enhanced results management/tracking systems, and (4) centralized quality reporting and metrics. The task force faced many challenges in implementing these recommendations, including disagreements on definitions of CSTR and on who should have responsibility for CSTR, changes to established work flows, limitations of resources and of existing information systems, and definition of metrics. CONCLUSIONS: This large-scale effort to improve the communication and follow-up of CSTR in a health care network continues with ongoing work to address implementation challenges, refine policies, prepare for a new clinical information system platform, and identify new ways to measure the extent of this important safety problem.

Effect of a pharmacist intervention on clinically important medication errors after hospital discharge: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Clinically important medication errors are common after hospital discharge. They include preventable or ameliorable adverse drug events (ADEs), as well as medication discrepancies or nonadherence with high potential for future harm (potential ADEs). OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a tailored intervention on the occurrence of clinically important medication errors after hospital discharge. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial with concealed allocation and blinded outcome assessors. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00632021) SETTING: Two tertiary care academic hospitals. PATIENTS: Adults hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes or acute decompensated heart failure. INTERVENTION: Pharmacist-assisted medication reconciliation, inpatient pharmacist counseling, low-literacy adherence aids, and individualized telephone follow-up after discharge. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the number of clinically important medication errors per patient during the first 30 days after hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included preventable or ameliorable ADEs, as well as potential ADEs. RESULTS: Among 851 participants, 432 (50.8%) had 1 or more clinically important medication errors; 22.9% of such errors were judged to be serious and 1.8% life-threatening. Adverse drug events occurred in 258 patients (30.3%) and potential ADEs in 253 patients (29.7%). The intervention did not significantly alter the per-patient number of clinically important medication errors (unadjusted incidence rate ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.10]) or ADEs (unadjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.09 [CI, 0.86 to 1.39]). Patients in the intervention group tended to have fewer potential ADEs (unadjusted incidence rate ratio, 0.80 [CI, 0.61 to 1.04]). LIMITATION: The characteristics of the study hospitals and participants may limit generalizability. CONCLUSION: Clinically important medication errors were present among one half of patients after hospital discharge and were not significantly reduced by a health-literacy-sensitive, pharmacist-delivered intervention. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

How can artificial intelligence decrease cognitive and work burden for front line practitioners?

Artificial intelligence (AI) has tremendous potential to improve the cognitive and work burden of clinicians across a range of clinical activities, which could lead to reduced burnout and better clinical care. The recent explosion of generative AI nicely illustrates this potential. Developers and organizations deploying AI have a responsibility to ensure AI is designed and implemented with end-user input, has mechanisms to identify and potentially reduce bias, and that the impact on cognitive and work burden is measured, monitored, and improved. This article focuses specifically on the role AI can play in reducing cognitive and work burden, outlines the critical issues associated with the use of AI, and serves as a call to action for vendors and users to work together to develop functionality that addresses these challenges.

Cognitive errors and logistical breakdowns contributing to missed and delayed diagnoses of breast and colorectal cancers: a process analysis of closed malpractice claims.

PURPOSE: To erform a process analysis of missed and delayed diagnoses of breast and colorectal cancers to identify: (1) the cognitive and logistical factors that lead to these diagnostic errors, and (2) prevention strategies. METHODS: Using 56 cases (43 breast, 13 colon) of missed and delayed diagnosis, we performed structured analyses to identify specific points in the diagnostic process in which errors occurred. Each error was classified as either a cognitive error or logistical breakdown. Finally, two physician-investigators identified strategies to prevent the errors in each case. RESULTS: Virtually all cases involved one or more cognitive errors (53/56, 95 %) and approximately half (31/56, 55 %) involved logistical breakdowns. The clinical activity most prone to cognitive error was the selection of the diagnostic strategy, both during the office visit (25/56, 45 %) and during interpretation of test results (22/50, 44 %). Arrangement of follow-up visits with a primary care physician (8/29, 28 %) or specialist physician (7/29, 26 %) were especially prone to logistical breakdowns. Adherence to current clinical guidelines could have prevented at least one error in 66 % of cases and assistance from a patient advocate could have prevented at least one error in 48 % of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive errors and logistical breakdowns are common among missed and delayed diagnoses of breast and colorectal cancers. Prevention strategies should focus on ensuring improving the effectiveness and use of clinical guidelines in the selection of diagnostic strategy, both during office visits and when interpreting test results. Tools to facilitate communication and to ensure that follow-up visits occur should also be considered.

Randomized controlled trial of health maintenance reminders provided directly to patients through an electronic PHR.

BACKGROUND: Provider and patient reminders can be effective in increasing rates of preventive screenings and vaccinations. However, the effect of patient-directed electronic reminders is understudied. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether providing reminders directly to patients via an electronic Personal Health Record (PHR) improved adherence to care recommendations. DESIGN: We conducted a cluster randomized trial without blinding from 2005 to 2007 at 11 primary care practices in the Partners HealthCare system. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 21,533 patients with access to a PHR were invited to the study, and 3,979 (18.5%) consented to enroll. INTERVENTIONS: Patients in the intervention arm received health maintenance (HM) reminders via a secure PHR "eJournal," which allowed them to review and update HM and family history information. Patients in the active control arm received access to an eJournal that allowed them to input and review information related to medications, allergies and diabetes management. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was adherence to guideline-based care recommendations. KEY RESULTS: Intention-to-treat analysis showed that patients in the intervention arm were significantly more likely to receive mammography (48.6% vs 29.5%, p = 0.006) and influenza vaccinations (22.0% vs 14.0%, p = 0.018). No significant improvement was observed in rates of other screenings. Although Pap smear completion rates were higher in the intervention arm (41.0% vs 10.4%, p < 0.001), this finding was no longer significant after excluding women's health clinics. Additional on-treatment analysis showed significant increases in mammography (p = 0.019) and influenza vaccination (p = 0.015) for intervention arm patients who opened an eJournal compared to control arm patients, but no differences for any measure among patients who did not open an eJournal. CONCLUSIONS: Providing patients with HM reminders via a PHR may be effective in improving some elements of preventive care.

Using an Objective Structured Clinical Examination to test adherence to Joint Commission National Patient Safety Goal--associated behaviors.

BACKGROUND: A study was conducted at a tertiary care academic medical center to assess a simulation-based, single-station Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) designed to evaluate intern trainees' familiarity with and adherence to behaviors associated with Joint Commission National Patient Safety Goals and The Joint Commission Universal Protocol for Preventing Wrong Site, Wrong Procedure, Wrong Person Surgery. METHOD: Subjects were interns, from all disciplines, completing basic skills training during intern orientation. The OSCE scenario was designed to assess 13 behaviors associated with four National Patient Safety Goals (1, 2, 3, and 7) from 2009 and 2010 and the Universal Protocol. Sessions were digitally recorded and independently reviewed by two observers, who scored behaviors using a standardized score sheet. Behaviors were assigned point values and tabulated for all trainees. Kappa coefficient was calculated to assess interrater reliability. RESULTS: One-hundred eleven (74.5%) of 149 interns completed the station. The average time to completion was 6.9 minutes (standard deviation [SD] 1.8; range, 3.5-12.6). Interns scored an average of 9.5 points (SD, 4.7; range, 2-20; mode, 8) of 26. The interrater reliability for the two reviewers was 0.9. Interns most frequently requested chlorhexidine to sterilize the patient's skin (98.2% of interns demonstrated); identifying an unlabeled medication vial as inappropriate for use was the most frequently missed item (8.1% of interns demonstrated). CONCLUSIONS: Behaviors related to tenets of patient safety and quality care can be assessed using a simple to design and execute OSCE. Using simulation to test behaviors associated with the National Patient Safety Goals may be a desirable adjunct to traditional simple knowledge-based tests.

Use of Hospital Capacity Command Centers to Improve Patient Flow and Safety: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVES: Delayed emergency department (ED) and hospital patient throughput is recognized as a critical threat to patient safety. Increasingly, hospitals are investing significantly in deploying command centers, long used in airlines and the military, to proactively manage hospital-wide patient flow. This scoping review characterizes the evidence related to hospital capacity command centers (CCCs) and synthesizes current data regarding their implementation. METHODS: As no consensus definition exists for CCCs, we characterized them as units (i) involving interdisciplinary, permanently colocated teams, (ii) using real-time data, and (iii) managing 2 or more patient flow functions (e.g., bed management, transfers, discharge planning, etc.), to distinguish CCCs from transfer centers. We undertook a scoping review of the medical and gray literature published through April 2019 related to CCCs meeting these criteria. RESULTS: We identified 8 eligible articles (including 4 peer-reviewed studies) describing 7 CCCs of varying designs. The most common CCC outcome measures related to transfer volume (n = 5) and ED boarding (n = 4). Several CCCs also monitored patient-level clinical parameters. Although all articles reported performance improvements, heterogeneity in CCC design and evidence quality currently restricts generalizability of findings. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous anecdotal accounts suggest that CCCs are being widely deployed in an effort to improve hospital patient flow and safety, yet peer-reviewed evidence regarding their design and effectiveness is in its earliest stages. The costs, objectives, and growing deployment of CCCs merit an investment in rigorous research to better measure their processes and outcomes. We propose a standard definition, conceptual framework, research priorities, and reporting standards to guide future investigation of CCCs.

Impact of a 4-year quality improvement initiative to improve communication of critical imaging test results.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of a 4-year initiative to develop, implement, monitor, and reinforce a communication of critical test results policy by using continuous-process improvement methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This HIPAA-compliant quality-improvement initiative was performed between February 2006 and January 2010. Institutional review board approval was received with waiver of informed consent for medical record reviews. A critical results policy for radiology was developed that was based on recommendations from the Joint Commission, American College of Radiology, and Massachusetts Coalition for the Prevention of Medical Errors. It defined types of findings (critical or discrepant), urgency level (red, orange, or yellow), timelines for notification, acceptable communication and documentation methods, and a communication escalation process. The primary outcome measure, adherence to the communication of critical results policy, was measured by periodic review of radiology reports with feedback of results to staff radiologists. The χ(2) statistic was used to assess for trends. RESULTS: During 21 quality reviews, 16,983 of 1,489,951 (1.14%) total radiology reports were reviewed, 1628 (9.6%) of which were assessed to contain critical results according to policy. Adherence to critical results policy increased from 28.6% (12 of 42) in February 2006 to 90.4% (122 of 135) by the end of the study period (P < .001), with most of the gains occurring in the first 2 years. CONCLUSION: Review and feedback of performance in regard to a policy on communication of critical imaging test results allowed significant improvement and sustained adherence to policy. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.11101396/-/DC1.

Effectiveness of interruptive alerts in increasing application functionality utilization: a controlled trial.

Medical applications frequently contain a wide range of functionalities. Users are often unaware of all of the functionalities available. More effective ways of delivering information about available functionalities to the users are needed. We conducted a pseudo-randomized controlled trial to determine whether interruptive alerts will increase utilization of several functionalities by the users of the Pre-Admission Medication List (PAML) Builder application at two academic medical centers. In a log-linear model, alerts increased total utilization of the promoted functionalities per PAML built by 70% compared to the controls at the site level (p<0.0001). At the user level, frequency of utilization of the PAML Builder functionalities by individual users increased by 0.03 for every extra alert shown to the user (p<0.0001). Alerts led to a nearly 2-fold increase in utilization of the promoted functionalities. Interruptive alerts are an effective method of delivering information about application functionalities to users.

Impact of multidisciplinary team huddles on patient safety: a systematic review and proposed taxonomy.

BACKGROUND: Despite significant advances, patient safety remains a critical public health concern. Daily huddles-discussions to identify and respond to safety risks-have been credited with enhancing safety culture in operationally complex industries including aviation and nuclear power. More recently, huddles have been endorsed as a mechanism to improve patient safety in healthcare. This review synthesises the literature related to the impact of hospital-based safety huddles. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature related to scheduled, multidisciplinary, hospital-based safety huddles through December 2019. We screened for studies (1) in which huddles were the primary intervention being assessed and (2) that measured the huddle programme's apparent impact using at least one quantitative metric. RESULTS: We identified 1034 articles; 24 met our criteria for review, of which 19 reflected unit-based huddles and 5 reflected hospital-wide or multiunit huddles. Of the 24 included articles, uncontrolled pre-post comparison was the prevailing study design; we identified only two controlled studies. Among the 12 unit-based studies that provided complete measures of statistical significance for reported outcomes, 11 reported statistically significant improvement among some or all outcomes. The objectives of huddle programmes and the language used to describe them varied widely across the studies we reviewed. CONCLUSION: While anecdotal accounts of successful huddle programmes abound and the evidence we reviewed appears favourable overall, high-quality peer-reviewed evidence regarding the effectiveness of hospital-based safety huddles, particularly at the hospital-wide level, is in its earliest stages. Additional rigorous research-especially focused on huddle programme design and implementation fidelity-would enhance the collective understanding of how huddles impact patient safety and other targeted outcomes. We propose a taxonomy and standardised reporting measures for future huddle-related studies to enhance comparability and evidence quality.