'Global trigger tool' shows that adverse events in hospitals may be ten times greater than previously measured.

Identification and measurement of adverse medical events is central to patient safety, forming a foundation for accountability, prioritizing problems to work on, generating ideas for safer care, and testing which interventions work. We compared three methods to detect adverse events in hospitalized patients, using the same patient sample set from three leading hospitals. We found that the adverse event detection methods commonly used to track patient safety in the United States today-voluntary reporting and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Patient Safety Indicators-fared very poorly compared to other methods and missed 90 percent of the adverse events. The Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Global Trigger Tool found at least ten times more confirmed, serious events than these other methods. Overall, adverse events occurred in one-third of hospital admissions. Reliance on voluntary reporting and the Patient Safety Indicators could produce misleading conclusions about the current safety of care in the US health care system and misdirect efforts to improve patient safety.

Improving colonoscopy referral rates through computer-supported, primary care practice redesign.

This quality improvement project was designed to improve rates of referral for colonoscopy screening in the Utah Health Research Network, University of Utah Community Clinics. This study was conducted between October 2004 and June 2007 with the main intervention being a clinic workflow modification using computerized screening reminders embedded in the electronic medical record (EMR). The intervention led to sustained improvement, largely driven by the performance of two network clinics. This study demonstrates that a robust EMR, with decision prompts, accompanied by clinic workflow changes and feedback to providers, can lead to sustained change in the rates of colonoscopy referral.

Quality of life of children with neurological impairment who receive a fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: Children with neurological impairment (NI) commonly have gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) treated with a fundoplication. The impact of this procedure on quality of life is poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: To examine the quality of life of children with NI who have received a fundoplication for GERD and of their caregivers. METHODS: The study was a prospective cohort study of children with NI and GERD who underwent a fundoplication at a children's hospital between January 1, 2005, and July 7, 2006. Quality of life of the children was assessed with the Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ) and of the caregivers with the Short-Form Health Survey Status (SF-36) and Parenting Stress Index (PSI), both at baseline and 1 month after fundoplication. Functional status was assessed using the WeeFIM. Repeated-measures analyses were performed. RESULTS: Forty-four of the 63 parents (70%) were enrolled. The median WeeFIM score was 31.2 versus the age-normal score of 83 (P = .001). Compared with the baseline scores, mean CHQ scores improved over 1 month in the domains of bodily pain (32.8 vs. 47.5, P = .01), role limitations-physical (30.6 vs. 56.6, P = .01), mental health (62.7 vs. 70.6, P = .01), family limitation of activities (43.3 vs. 55.1, P = .03), and parental time (43.0 vs. 55.3, P = .03). The parental SF-36 domain of vitality improved from baseline over 1 month (41.3 vs. 48.2, P = .001), but there were no changes from baseline in Parenting Stress scores. CONCLUSIONS: Parents reported that the quality of life of children with NI who receive a fundoplication for GERD was improved from baseline in several domains 1 month after surgery. The quality of life and stress of caregivers did not improve in nearly all domains, at least in the short term.

Informing the front line about common respiratory viral epidemics.

The nature of clinical medicine is to focus on individuals rather than the populations from which they originate. This orientation can be problematic in the context of acute healthcare delivery during routine winter outbreaks of viral respiratory disease where an individuals likelihood of viral infection depends on knowledge of local disease incidence. The level of interest in and perceived utility of community and regional infection data for front line clinicians providing acute care is unclear. Based on input from clinicians, we developed an automated analysis and reporting system that delivers pathogen-specific epidemic curves derived from a viral panel that tests for influenza, RSV, adenovirus, parainfluenza and human metapneumovirus. Surveillance summaries were actively e-mailed to clinicians practicing in emergency, urgent and primary care settings and posted on a web site for passive consumption. We demonstrated the feasibility and sustainability of a system that provides both timely and clinically useful surveillance information.