Drug allergies documented in electronic health records of a large healthcare system.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of drug allergies documented in electronic health records (EHRs) of large patient populations is understudied. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe the prevalence of common drug allergies and patient characteristics documented in EHRs of a large healthcare network over the last two decades. METHODS: Drug allergy data were obtained from EHRs of patients who visited two large tertiary care hospitals in Boston from 1990 to 2013. The prevalence of each drug and drug class was calculated and compared by sex and race/ethnicity. The number of allergies per patient was calculated and the frequency of patients having 1, 2, 3…, or 10+ drug allergies was reported. We also conducted a trend analysis by comparing the proportion of each allergy to the total number of drug allergies over time. RESULTS: Among 1 766 328 patients, 35.5% of patients had at least one reported drug allergy with an average of 1.95 drug allergies per patient. The most commonly reported drug allergies in this population were to penicillins (12.8%), sulfonamide antibiotics (7.4%), opiates (6.8%), and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (3.5%). The relative proportion of allergies to angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) have more than doubled since early 2000s. Drug allergies were most prevalent among females and white patients except for NSAIDs, ACE inhibitors, and thiazide diuretics, which were more prevalent in black patients. CONCLUSION: Females and white patients may be more likely to experience a reaction from common medications. An increase in reported allergies to ACE inhibitors and statins is noteworthy.

Digital technology to support lifestyle and health behaviour changes in surgical patients: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Digital technologies (such as smartphone applications, activity trackers, and e-learning platforms) have supported patients with long-term conditions to change their lifestyle health behaviours. The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of digital technologies in supporting patients undergoing elective surgery to change their health behaviours. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted of articles reporting a digital intervention supporting behaviour change in adult patients who underwent elective bariatric, oncological or orthopaedic surgery. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from inception to March 2019 for quantitative intervention studies with a specific focus on physical activity, dietary intake, and weight loss in patients before and after surgery (PROSPERO: CRD42019127972). The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist was used to assess study quality. RESULTS: Of 3021 citations screened, 17 studies were included comprising 4923 surgical patients; these included experimental (pre-post design, feasibility studies, and RCTs) and observational studies. Three factors were identified as effective for supporting health behaviour change in elective surgical populations: digital technology delivery, implementation, and theoretical underpinning. Six of eight studies that referred to behaviour change theories observed significant improvements in health behaviour relating to reduced weight regain, and improved lifestyle choices for physical activity and diet. Meta-analysis was not possible because of heterogeneous outcome measures. CONCLUSION: Digital technologies may effectively support behavioural change in patients undergoing elective surgery.

Surgical incidents and their impact on operating theatre staff: qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Surgical incidents can have significant effects on both patients and health professionals, including emotional distress and depression. The aim of this study was to explore the personal and professional impacts of surgical incidents on operating theatre staff. METHODS: Face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted with a range of different healthcare professionals working in operating theatres, including surgeons and anaesthetists, operating department practitioners, and theatre nurses, and across different surgical specialties at five different hospitals. All interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using an inductive thematic approach, which involved reading and re-reading the transcripts, assigning preliminary codes, and searching for patterns and themes within the codes, with the aid of NVivo 12 software. These emerging themes were discussed with the wider research team to gain their input. RESULTS: Some 45 interviews were conducted, generally lasting between 30 and 75 min. Three overarching themes emerged: personal and professional impact; impact of the investigation process; and positive consequences or impact. Participants recalled experiencing negative emotions following surgical incidents that depended on the severity of the incident, patient outcomes, and the support that staff received. A culture of blame, inadequate support, and lack of a clear and transparent investigative process appeared to worsen impact. CONCLUSION: The study indicated that more support is needed for operating theatre staff involved in surgical incidents. Greater transparency and better information during the investigation of such incidents for staff are still needed.

Systematic review of psychological, emotional and behavioural impacts of surgical incidents on operating theatre staff.

BACKGROUND: Adverse surgical incidents affect both patients and health professionals. This study sought to explore the effect of surgical incidents on operating theatre staff and their subsequent behaviours. METHODS: Eligible studies were primary research or reviews that focused on the effect of incidents on operating theatre staff in primary, secondary or tertiary care settings. MEDLINE, Embase, CINALH and PsycINFO were searched. A data extraction form was used to capture pertinent information from included studies and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool to appraise their quality. PRISMA-P reporting guidelines were followed and the review is registered with PROSPERO. RESULTS: A total of 3918 articles were identified, with 667 duplicates removed and 3230 excluded at the title, abstract and full-text stages. Of 21 included articles, eight focused on the impact of surgical incidents on surgeons and anaesthetists. Only two involved theatre nurses and theatre technicians. Five key themes emerged: the emotional impact on health professionals, organization culture and support, individual coping strategies, learning from surgical complications and recommended changes to practice. CONCLUSION: Health professionals suffered emotional distress and often changed their behaviour following a surgical incident. Both organizations and individual clinicians can do a great deal to support staff in the aftermath of serious incidents.

Standard Information Models for Representing Adverse Sensitivity Information in Clinical Documents.

BACKGROUND: Adverse sensitivity (e.g., allergy and intolerance) information is a critical component of any electronic health record system. While several standards exist for structured entry of adverse sensitivity information, many clinicians record this data as free text. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to 1) identify and compare the existing common adverse sensitivity information models, and 2) to evaluate the coverage of the adverse sensitivity information models for representing allergy information on a subset of inpatient and outpatient adverse sensitivity clinical notes. METHODS: We compared four common adverse sensitivity information models: Health Level 7 Allergy and Intolerance Domain Analysis Model, HL7-DAM; the Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources, FHIR; the Consolidated Continuity of Care Document, C-CDA; and OpenEHR, and evaluated their coverage on a corpus of inpatient and outpatient notes (n = 120). RESULTS: We found that allergy specialists' notes had the highest frequency of adverse sensitivity attributes per note, whereas emergency department notes had the fewest attributes. Overall, the models had many similarities in the central attributes which covered between 75% and 95% of adverse sensitivity information contained within the notes. However, representations of some attributes (especially the value-sets) were not well aligned between the models, which is likely to present an obstacle for achieving data interoperability. Also, adverse sensitivity exceptions were not well represented among the information models. CONCLUSIONS: Although we found that common adverse sensitivity models cover a significant portion of relevant information in the clinical notes, our results highlight areas needed to be reconciled between the standards for data interoperability.

Discussion of "Attitude of physicians towards automatic alerting in computerized physician order entry systems".

With these comments on the paper "Attitude of Physicians Towards Automatic Alerting in Computerized Physician Order Entry Systems", written by Martin Jung and co-authors, with Dr. Elske Ammenwerth as senior author [1], the journal wants to stimulate a broad discussion on computerized physician order entry systems. An international group of experts have been invited by the editor of Methods to comment on this paper. Each of the invited commentaries forms one section of this paper.