Partnering With a Medical Malpractice Insurer to Improve Patient Safety and Decrease Risk.

Implementing evolving science into clinical practice remains challenging. Assimilating new scientific evidence into clinical protocols and best practice recommendations, in a timely manner, can be difficult. In this article, we examine the value of partnering with a captive medical malpractice insurance company and its Patient Safety Organization to use data and convening opportunities to build upon the principles of implementation science and foster efficient and widespread adoption of the most current evidence-based interventions. Analyses of medical malpractice and root-cause analysis data set the context for this partnership and acted as a catalyst for creating best practice guidelines for adopting therapeutic hypothermia in the treatment of neonatal encephalopathy. What follows is a powerful example of successfully leveraging the collective wisdom of healthcare providers across specialties and institutional lines to move patient safety forward while managing risk.

Changes in medical errors after implementation of a handoff program.

BACKGROUND: Miscommunications are a leading cause of serious medical errors. Data from multicenter studies assessing programs designed to improve handoff of information about patient care are lacking. METHODS: We conducted a prospective intervention study of a resident handoff-improvement program in nine hospitals, measuring rates of medical errors, preventable adverse events, and miscommunications, as well as resident workflow. The intervention included a mnemonic to standardize oral and written handoffs, handoff and communication training, a faculty development and observation program, and a sustainability campaign. Error rates were measured through active surveillance. Handoffs were assessed by means of evaluation of printed handoff documents and audio recordings. Workflow was assessed through time-motion observations. The primary outcome had two components: medical errors and preventable adverse events. RESULTS: In 10,740 patient admissions, the medical-error rate decreased by 23% from the preintervention period to the postintervention period (24.5 vs. 18.8 per 100 admissions, P<0.001), and the rate of preventable adverse events decreased by 30% (4.7 vs. 3.3 events per 100 admissions, P<0.001). The rate of nonpreventable adverse events did not change significantly (3.0 and 2.8 events per 100 admissions, P=0.79). Site-level analyses showed significant error reductions at six of nine sites. Across sites, significant increases were observed in the inclusion of all prespecified key elements in written documents and oral communication during handoff (nine written and five oral elements; P<0.001 for all 14 comparisons). There were no significant changes from the preintervention period to the postintervention period in the duration of oral handoffs (2.4 and 2.5 minutes per patient, respectively; P=0.55) or in resident workflow, including patient-family contact and computer time. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the handoff program was associated with reductions in medical errors and in preventable adverse events and with improvements in communication, without a negative effect on workflow. (Funded by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and others.).

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.)

Lessons learned from implementation of computerized provider order entry in 5 community hospitals: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) can improve patient safety, quality and efficiency, but hospitals face a host of barriers to adopting CPOE, ranging from resistance among physicians to the cost of the systems. In response to the incentives for meaningful use of health information technology and other market forces, hospitals in the United States are increasingly moving toward the adoption of CPOE. The purpose of this study was to characterize the experiences of hospitals that have successfully implemented CPOE. METHODS: We used a qualitative approach to observe clinical activities and capture the experiences of physicians, nurses, pharmacists and administrators at five community hospitals in Massachusetts (USA) that adopted CPOE in the past few years. We conducted formal, structured observations of care processes in diverse inpatient settings within each of the hospitals and completed in-depth, semi-structured interviews with clinicians and staff by telephone. After transcribing the audiorecorded interviews, we analyzed the content of the transcripts iteratively, guided by principles of the Immersion and Crystallization analytic approach. Our objective was to identify attitudes, behaviors and experiences that would constitute useful lessons for other hospitals embarking on CPOE implementation. RESULTS: Analysis of observations and interviews resulted in findings about the CPOE implementation process in five domains: governance, preparation, support, perceptions and consequences. Successful institutions implemented clear organizational decision-making mechanisms that involved clinicians (governance). They anticipated the need for education and training of a wide range of users (preparation). These hospitals deployed ample human resources for live, in-person training and support during implementation. Successful implementation hinged on the ability of clinical leaders to address and manage perceptions and the fear of change. Implementation proceeded smoothly when institutions identified and anticipated the consequences of the change. CONCLUSIONS: The lessons learned in the five domains identified in this study may be useful for other community hospitals embarking on CPOE adoption.

Electronic risk alerts to improve primary care management of chest pain: a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary care evaluation of chest pain represents a significant diagnostic challenge. OBJECTIVE: To determine if electronic alerts to physicians can improve the quality and safety of chest pain evaluations. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, controlled trial conducted between November 2008 and January 2010 among 292 primary care clinicians caring for 7,083 adult patients with chest pain and no history of cardiovascular disease. INTERVENTION: Clinicians received alerts within the electronic health record during office visits for chest pain. One alert recommended performance of an electrocardiogram and administration of aspirin for high risk patients (Framingham Risk Score (FRS) ≥ 10%), and a second alert recommended against performance of cardiac stress testing for low risk patients (FRS < 10%). MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcomes included performance of an electrocardiogram and administration of aspirin therapy for high risk patients; and avoidance of cardiac stress testing for low risk patients. KEY RESULTS: The majority (81%) of patients with chest pain were classified as low risk. High risk patients were more likely than low risk patients to be evaluated in the emergency department (11% versus 5%, p < 0.01) and to be hospitalized (7% versus 3%, p < 0.01). Acute myocardial infarction occurred among 26 (0.4%) patients, more commonly among high risk compared to low risk patients (1.1% versus 0.2%, p < 0.01). Among high risk patients, there was no difference between the intervention and control groups in rates of performing electrocardiograms (51% versus 48%, p = 0.33) or administering aspirin (20% versus 18%, p = 0.43). Among low risk patients, there was no difference between intervention and control groups in rates of cardiac stress testing (10% versus 9%, p = 0.40). CONCLUSIONS: Primary care management of chest pain is suboptimal for both high and low risk patients. Electronic alerts do not increase risk-appropriate care for these patients.

Off the hamster wheel? Qualitative evaluation of a payment-linked patient-centered medical home (PCMH) pilot.

CONTEXT: Many primary care practices are moving toward the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model and increasingly are offering payment incentives linked to PCMH changes. Despite widespread acceptance of general PCMH concepts, there is still a pressing need to examine carefully and critically what transformation means for primary care practices and their patients and the experience of undergoing such change in a practice. METHODS: We used a qualitative case study approach to explore the underlying dynamics of change at five practices participating in PCMH transformation efforts linked to payment reform. The evaluation consisted of structured site visits, interviews, observations, and artifact reviews followed by a structured review of transcripts and documents for patterns, themes, and insights related to PCMH implementation. FINDINGS: We describe both the detailed components of each practice's transformation efforts and a grounded taxonomy of eight insights stemming from the experiences of these medical homes. We identified specific contextual factors related to wide variations in change tactics. We also observed widely varying approaches to catalyzing change using (or not) external consultants, specific challenges regarding health information technology implementation, team and staff role restructuring, compensation, and change fatigue, and several unexpected potential confounders or alternative explanations for practice success. CONCLUSIONS: Our evaluation affirms the value and necessity of qualitative methods for understanding primary care practice transformation, and it should encourage ongoing and future pilots to include assessments of the PCMH change process beyond clinical markers and claims data. The results raise insights into the heterogeneity of medical home transformation, the central but complex role of payment reform in creating a space for change, the ability of small practices to achieve substantial change in a short time period, and the challenges of sustaining it.

Adverse drug event rates in six community hospitals and the potential impact of computerized physician order entry for prevention.

CONTEXT: Medications represent a major cause of harm and are costly for hospitalized patients, but more is known about these issues in large academic hospitals than in smaller hospitals. OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence of adverse drug events (ADEs) in six community hospitals. DESIGN: Multicenter, retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Six Massachusetts community hospitals with 100 to 300 beds. PATIENTS: From 109,641 adult patients hospitalized from January 2005 through August 2006, a random sample of 1,200 patients was drawn, 200 per site. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ADEs and preventable ADEs. METHODS: Presence of an ADE was evaluated using an adaptation of a trigger instrument developed by the Institute for Health Care Improvement. Independent reviewers classified events by preventability, severity, and potential for preventability by computerized physician order entry (CPOE). RESULTS: A total of 180 ADEs occurred in 141 patients (rate, 15.0/100 admissions). Overall, 75% were preventable. ADEs were rated as serious in 49.4% and life threatening in 11.7%. Patients with ADEs were older (mean age, 74.6 years, p < 0.001), more often female (60.3%, p = 0.61), and more often Caucasian (96.5%, p < 0.001) than patients without ADEs. Of the preventable ADEs, 81.5% were judged potentially preventable by CPOE. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of ADEs in these community hospital admissions was high, and most ADEs were preventable, mostly through CPOE. These data suggest that CPOE may be beneficial in this setting.

Occurrence of adverse, often preventable, events in community hospitals involving nephrotoxic drugs or those excreted by the kidney.

Medication errors in patients with reduced creatinine clearance are harmful and costly; however, most studies have been conducted in large academic hospitals. As there are few studies regarding this issue in smaller community hospitals, we conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study in six community hospitals (100 to 300 beds) to assess the incidence and severity of adverse drug events (ADEs) in patients with reduced creatinine clearance. A chart review was performed on adult patients hospitalized during a 20-month study period with serum creatinine over 1.5 mg/dl who were exposed to drugs that are nephrotoxic or cleared by the kidney. Among 109,641 patients, 17,614 had reduced creatinine clearance, and in a random sample of 900 of these patients, there were 498 potential ADEs and 90 ADEs. Among these ADEs, 91% were preventable, 51% were serious, 44% were significant, and 4.5% were life threatening. Of the potential ADEs, 54% were serious, 44% were significant, 1.6% were life threatening, and 96.6% were not intercepted. All 82 preventable events could have been intercepted by renal dose checking. Our study shows that ADEs were common in patients with impaired kidney function in community hospitals, and many appear potentially preventable with renal dose checking.

Risks of complications by attending physicians after performing nighttime procedures.

CONTEXT: Few data exist on the relationships between experienced physicians' work hours and sleep, and patient safety. OBJECTIVE: To determine if sleep opportunities for attending surgeons and obstetricians/gynecologists are associated with the risk of complications. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Matched retrospective cohort study of procedures performed from January 1999 through June 2008 by attending physicians (86 surgeons and 134 obstetricians/gynecologists) who had been in the hospital performing another procedure involving adult patients for at least part of the preceding night (12 am-6 am, postnighttime procedures). Sleep opportunity was calculated as the time between end of the overnight procedure and start of the first procedure the following day. Matched control procedures included as many as 5 procedures of the same type performed by the same physician on days without preceding overnight procedures. Complications were identified and classified by a blinded 3-step process that included administrative screening, medical record reviews, and clinician ratings. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of complications in postnighttime procedures as compared with controls; rates of complications in postnighttime procedures among physicians with more than 6-hour sleep opportunities vs those with sleep opportunities of 6 hours or less. RESULTS: A total of 919 surgical and 957 obstetrical postnighttime procedures were matched with 3552 and 3945 control procedures, respectively. Complications occurred in 101 postnighttime procedures (5.4%) and 365 control procedures (4.9%) (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84-1.41). Complications occurred in 82 of 1317 postnighttime procedures with sleep opportunities of 6 hours or less (6.2%) vs 19 of 559 postnighttime procedures with sleep opportunities of more than 6 hours (3.4%) (odds ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.02-2.89). Postnighttime procedures completed after working more than 12 hours (n = 958) compared with 12 hours or less (n = 918) had nonsignificantly higher complication rates (6.5% vs 4.3%; odds ratio, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.96-2.27). CONCLUSION: Overall, procedures performed the day after attending physicians worked overnight were not associated with significantly increased complication rates, although there was an increased rate of complications among postnighttime surgical procedures performed by physicians with sleep opportunities of less than 6 hours.

Risk factors in preventable adverse drug events in pediatric outpatients.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there are racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, parental linguistic, or parental educational disparities in children who experienced an adverse drug event (ADE) in the ambulatory setting. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a prospective cohort study of pediatric patients <21 years seen during 2-month study periods from July 2002 to April 2003 at 6 office practices in Boston. The primary outcome measure was ADEs. Descriptive analysis of patient characteristics and types of ADEs experienced was followed by multivariate analysis to determine risk factors associated with presence of a preventable ADE. RESULTS: A total of 1689 patients receiving 2155 prescriptions were analyzed via a survey and chart review. Overall, 242 children (14%) experienced an ADE, of which 55 (23%) had a preventable ADE and 186 (77%) had a non-preventable ADE. In multivariate analysis, children with multiple prescriptions (odds ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.01-2.11) were at increased risk of having a preventable ADE, controlling for parental education, racial/ethnic, English proficiency, practice type, and duration of care. CONCLUSIONS: Children with multiple prescriptions are at increased risk of having a preventable ADE. Further attention should be directed toward improved communication among healthcare providers and patients.

Adverse drug events and medication errors in psychiatry: methodological issues regarding identification and classification.

Abstract Adverse drug events and medication errors have received extensive study recently in a variety of clinical populations, though compared to many other areas relatively little work has focused on this area in psychiatry, especially with respect to the contribution of error to harm. The goal of this paper is to discuss methodological issues around measurement of medication safety in psychiatric patients. Against the background of a systems approach, a modern perspective of error management is discussed, and a multidimensional procedure for detection and classification of incidents related to the medication process is presented. This method has proven successful in non-psychiatric settings yielding the current best estimate of error rates and providing insight into the underlying causes. While this general approach can be adapted to the psychiatric setting, a number of issues make measurement especially challenging in psychiatry. These include the fluctuating course of psychiatric disorders, reduced patient adherence to the medication process, adverse effects which are often similar to symptoms of the underlying disorder, the frequent use of wide dose intervals depending on the clinical situation, and the presence of many drug-drug interactions. Data collected by means of the presented approach provide a basis for the development of effective strategies to reduce the risk of medication errors and thus improve patient safety in psychiatric care.

Medication safety.

Patient safety is a state of mind, not a technology. The technologies used in the medical setting represent tools that must be properly designed, used well, and assessed on an on-going basis. Moreover, in all settings, building a culture of safety is pivotal for improving safety, and many nontechnologic approaches, such as medication reconciliation and teaching patients about their medications, are also essential. This article addresses the topic of medication safety and examines specific strategies being used to decrease the incidence of medication errors across various clinical settings.

Medication safety in a psychiatric hospital.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the epidemiology of medication errors (MEs) and adverse drug events (ADEs) in a psychiatric hospital. METHODS: We conducted a 6-month prospective observational study in a 172-bed academic psychiatric hospital. Errors and ADEs were found by way of chart review, staff reports and pharmacy intervention reports. Physicians rated incidents as to the presence of injury, preventability and severity of an injury. Serious MEs were nonintercepted MEs with potential for harm (near misses) and preventable ADEs. RESULTS: We studied 1871 admissions with 19,180 patient-days. The rate of ADEs and serious MEs were 10 and 6.3 per 1000 patient-days, respectively. Preventable ADEs accounted for 13% of all ADEs (25/191). The most common classes of drugs associated with ADEs were atypical antipsychotics (37%). Nonpsychiatric drugs accounted for only 4% of nonpreventable ADEs but were associated with nearly one third of all preventable ADEs and near misses. MEs were most frequently associated with physician orders (68%), but there was also a high rate of nursing transcription errors (20%). CONCLUSIONS: ADEs and serious MEs were common among psychiatric inpatients and similar to rates in studies of general hospital inpatients. Medication safety interventions targeting psychiatric care need further study.

Adverse drug events in pediatric outpatients.

OBJECTIVE: To determine rates and types of adverse drug events (ADEs) in the pediatric ambulatory setting. METHODS: A prospective cohort study at 6 office practices in the greater Boston area was conducted over 2-month periods. Duplicate prescription review, telephone surveys 10 days and 2 months after visit, and chart reviews were done. A 2-physician panel classified the severity, preventability, and ability to ameliorate (ie, if the severity or duration of the side effect could have been mitigated by improved communication) ADEs. RESULTS: We identified 57 preventable ADEs (rate 3%; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 3%-4%) and 226 nonpreventable ADEs (rate 13%; 95% CI, 11%-15%) in the medical care of 1788 patients. Of the ADEs, 152 (54%) were able to be ameliorated. None of the preventable ADEs were life threatening, although 8 (14%) were serious. Forty (70%) of the preventable ADEs were related to parent drug administration. Improved communication between health care providers and parents and improved communication between pharmacists and parents, whether in the office or in the pharmacy, were judged to be the prevention strategies with greatest potential. CONCLUSIONS: Patient harm from medication use was common in the pediatric ambulatory setting. Errors in home medication administration resulted in the majority of preventable ADEs. Approximately one fifth of ADEs were potentially preventable and many more were potentially able to be ameliorated. Rates of ADEs due to errors are comparable in children and adults despite less medication utilization in children.

Medication dispensing errors and potential adverse drug events before and after implementing bar code technology in the pharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Many dispensing errors made in hospital pharmacies can harm patients. Some hospitals are investing in bar code technology to reduce these errors, but data about its efficacy are limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether implementation of bar code technology reduced dispensing errors and potential adverse drug events (ADEs). DESIGN: Before-and-after study using direct observations. SETTING: Hospital pharmacy at a 735-bed tertiary care academic medical center. INTERVENTION: A bar code-assisted dispensing system was implemented in 3 configurations. In 2 configurations, all doses were scanned once during the dispensing process. In the third configuration, only 1 dose was scanned if several doses of the same medication were being dispensed. MEASUREMENTS: Target dispensing errors, defined as dispensing errors that bar code technology was designed to address, and target potential ADEs, defined as target dispensing errors that can harm patients. RESULTS: In the pre- and post-bar code implementation periods, the authors observed 115,164 and 253,984 dispensed medication doses, respectively. Overall, the rates of target potential ADEs and all potential ADEs decreased by 74% and 63%, respectively. Of the 3 configurations of bar code technology studied, the 2 configurations that required staff to scan all doses had a 93% to 96% relative reduction in the incidence of target dispensing errors (P < 0.001) and 86% to 97% relative reduction in the incidence of potential ADEs (P < 0.001). However, the configuration that did not require scanning of every dose had only a 60% relative reduction in the incidence of target dispensing errors (P < 0.001) and an increased (by 2.4-fold) incidence of target potential ADEs (P = 0.014). There were several potentially life-threatening ADEs involving intravenous dopamine and intravenous heparin in that configuration. LIMITATIONS: The authors used surrogate outcomes; did not mask assessors to the purpose of study; and excluded the controlled substance fill process (a process with low error rates at baseline) from the study, which may bias the combined decrease in error rates toward a larger magnitude. CONCLUSIONS: The overall rates of dispensing errors and potential ADEs substantially decreased after implementing bar code technology. However, the technology should be configured to scan every dose during the dispensing process.

Intravenous medication safety and smart infusion systems: lessons learned and future opportunities.

The Institute of Medicine report To Err Is Human: Building a Safe Health System greatly increased national awareness of the need to improve patient safety in general and medication safety in particular. Infusion-related errors are associated with the greatest risk of harm, and "smart" (computerized) infusion systems are currently available that can avert high-risk errors and provide previously unavailable data for continuous quality improvement (CQI) efforts. As healthcare organizations consider how to invest scarce dollars, infusion nurses have a key role to play in assessing need, evaluating technology, and selecting and implementing specific products. This article reviews the need to improve intravenous medication safety. It describes smart infusion systems and the results they have achieved. Finally, it details the lessons learned and the opportunities identified through the use of smart infusion technology at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts.

Unrealized potential and residual consequences of electronic prescribing on pharmacy workflow in the outpatient pharmacy.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic prescribing systems have often been promoted as a tool for reducing medication errors and adverse drug events. Recent evidence has revealed that adoption of electronic prescribing systems can lead to unintended consequences such as the introduction of new errors. The purpose of this study is to identify and characterize the unrealized potential and residual consequences of electronic prescribing on pharmacy workflow in an outpatient pharmacy. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team conducted direct observations of workflow in an independent pharmacy and semi-structured interviews with pharmacy staff members about their perceptions of the unrealized potential and residual consequences of electronic prescribing systems. We used qualitative methods to iteratively analyze text data using a grounded theory approach, and derive a list of major themes and subthemes related to the unrealized potential and residual consequences of electronic prescribing. RESULTS: We identified the following five themes: Communication, workflow disruption, cost, technology, and opportunity for new errors. These contained 26 unique subthemes representing different facets of our observations and the pharmacy staff's perceptions of the unrealized potential and residual consequences of electronic prescribing. DISCUSSION: We offer targeted solutions to improve electronic prescribing systems by addressing the unrealized potential and residual consequences that we identified. These recommendations may be applied not only to improve staff perceptions of electronic prescribing systems but also to improve the design and/or selection of these systems in order to optimize communication and workflow within pharmacies while minimizing both cost and the potential for the introduction of new errors.

Adverse drug events caused by serious medication administration errors.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how often serious or life-threatening medication administration errors with the potential to cause harm (potential adverse drug events) result in actual harm (adverse drug events (ADEs)) in the hospital setting. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review of clinical events following observed medication administration errors. BACKGROUND: Medication errors are common at the medication administration stage for inpatients. While many errors can cause harm, it is unclear exactly how often. METHODS: In a previous study where 14 041 medication administrations were directly observed, 1271 medication administration errors were discovered, of which 133 had the potential to cause serious or life-threatening harm and were considered serious or life-threatening potential adverse drug events. As a follow-up, clinical reviewers conducted detailed chart review of serious or life-threatening potential ADEs to determine if they caused an ADE. Reviewers assessed severity of the ADE and attribution to the error. RESULTS: Ten (7.5% (95% CI 6.98 to 8.01)) actual ADEs resulted from the 133 serious and life-threatening potential ADEs, of which 6 resulted in significant, three in serious, and one life threatening injury. Therefore 4 (3% (95% CI 2.12 to 3.6)) of serious or life threatening potential ADEs led to serious or life threatening ADEs. Half of the ADEs were caused by dosage or monitoring errors for anti-hypertensives. CONCLUSIONS: Unintercepted potential ADEs at the medication administration stage can cause serious patient harm. At hospitals where 6 million doses are administered per year, about 4000 preventable ADEs would be attributable to medication administration errors annually.

Preventability of adverse drug events involving multiple drugs using publicly available clinical decision support tools.

PURPOSE: The results of a retrospective evaluation of the frequency and preventability of adverse drug events (ADEs) involving multiple drugs among hospital inpatients are reported. METHODS: Data collected in a previous cohort study of 180 actual ADEs and 552 potential ADEs (PADEs) at six community hospitals in Massachusetts were analyzed to determine the frequency and types of multiple-drug ADEs and the extent to which the ADEs might have been prevented using publicly available clinical decision-support (CDS) knowledge bases. None of the hospitals had a computerized prescriber-order-entry system at the time of data collection (January 2005-August 2006). RESULTS: A total of 17 ADEs (rate, 1.4 per 100 admissions) and 146 PADEs (rate, 12.2 per 100 admissions) involving multiple drugs were identified. The documented events were related to drug duplication (n = 126), drug-drug interaction (n = 21), additive effects (n = 14), and therapeutic duplication (n = 7) or a combination of those factors. The majority of actual ADEs were due to drug-drug interactions, most commonly involving opioids, benzodiazepines, or cardiac medications; about 75% of the PADEs involved excessive drug doses resulting from order duplication or the prescribing of combination drugs with overlapping ingredients, usually products containing acetaminophen and an opioid. It was determined that 5 (29.4%) of the ADEs and 131 (89.7%) of the PADEs could have been detected through the use of the evaluated CDS tools. CONCLUSION: A substantial number of actual ADEs and PADEs in the community hospital setting may be preventable through the use of publicly available CDS knowledge bases.

An electronic patient risk communication board.

Communication failures have been identified as the root cause of the majority of medical malpractice claims and patient safety violations. We believe it is essential to share key patient risk information with healthcare team members at the patient's bedside. In this study, we developed an electronic Patient Risk Communication Board (ePRCB) to assist in bridging the communication gap between all health care team members. The goal of the ePRCB is to effectively communicate the patient's key risk factors, such as a fall risk or risk of aspiration, to the healthcare team and to reduce adverse events caused by communication failures. The ePRCB will transmit patient risk information and tailored interventions with easy-to-understand icons on an LCD screen at the point of care. A set of patient risk reminder icons was developed and validated by focus groups. We used the results of the evaluation to refine the icons for the ePRCB.