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.).

Healthier Children's Meals in Restaurants: An Exploratory Study to Inform Approaches That Are Acceptable Across Stakeholders.

OBJECTIVE: Assess parents', children's, and restaurant executives' perspectives on children's meals in restaurants. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Parents and children completed predominantly quantitative surveys at 4 quick- and full-service restaurant locations. Telephone interviews were conducted with executives representing additional restaurants. PARTICIPANTS: Parents (n = 59) and their first- through fourth-grade children (n = 58); executives (n = 4). VARIABLES MEASURED: Parent/child perspectives on child meal selection and toy incentives in restaurants; executives' views on kids' meals and barriers to supplying healthier kids' meals. ANALYSIS: Frequencies, thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 63% of children ordered from children's menus, 8% of whom ordered healthier kids' meals. Half of parents reported that children determined their own orders. Taste was the most common reason for children's meal choices. Most (76%) children reported visiting the restaurant previously; 64% of them placed their usual order. Parents' views on toy incentives were mixed. Themes from executive interviews highlighted factors driving children's menu offerings, including children's habits and preferences and the need to use preexisting pantry items. Executives described menu changes as driven by profitability, consumer demand, regulation, and corporate social responsibility. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Findings can inform the development of restaurant interventions that are effective in promoting healthier eating and are acceptable to parents, children, and restaurant personnel.

Treatment decision making for adolescents with familial hypercholesterolemia: Role of family history and past experiences.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) are at high risk for underdiagnosis and inadequate treatment. Yet, little is known about the factors that influence the medical decision making of AYAs with FH and their families. OBJECTIVE: This study explores how family medical history, family narratives of medical experiences, and AYA medical experiences together function as "experiential evidence" and influence screening and treatment decisions. METHODS: Twenty-four parents and AYAs affected by FH from a pediatric preventive cardiology practice responded to a survey and a semistructured qualitative interview. Transcribed interviews were analyzed using a modified grounded theory approach. Study design, instruments, and interpretation of results were informed by a 20-member stakeholder panel. RESULTS: AYAs and parents reported extensive personal and family experiences with cholesterol and cardiovascular conditions and treatments, sometimes distinct from FH, which were used as evidence to inform their own perceptions of FH risk and treatment. This experiential evidence impacted perceptions of: (1) hereditary risk for FH diagnoses, (2) risk for future cardiovascular disease, (3) risks associated with treatments, and (4) capacity to comply with recommended treatments. Although experiences of family members initially informed screening and treatment decisions, the subsequent personal experiences of AYAs led to new experiential evidence that informed future decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Family cardiovascular history related to and distinct from FH influenced screening and treatment decisions of AYAs and parents affected by FH. Additional clinical assessment of personal and family medical experiences may enhance understanding of the decision-making processes among AYAs and ultimately improve adherence to screening and treatment recommendations.

Development, implementation, and dissemination of the I-PASS handoff curriculum: A multisite educational intervention to improve patient handoffs.

Patient handoffs are a key source of communication failures and adverse events in hospitals. Despite Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements for residency training programs to provide formal handoff skills training and to monitor handoffs, well-established curricula and validated skills assessment tools are lacking. Developing a handoff curriculum is challenging because of the need for standardized processes and faculty development, cultural resistance to change, and diverse institution- and unit-level factors. In this article, the authors apply a logic model to describe the process they used from June 2010 to February 2014 to develop, implement, and disseminate an innovative, comprehensive handoff curriculum in pediatric residency training programs as a fundamental component of the multicenter Initiative for Innovation in Pediatric Education-Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings Accelerating Safe Sign-outs (I-PASS) Study. They describe resources, activities, and outputs, and report preliminary learner outcomes using data from resident and faculty evaluations of the I-PASS Handoff Curriculum: 96% of residents and 97% of faculty agreed or strongly agreed that the curriculum promoted acquisition of relevant skills for patient care activities. They also share lessons learned that could be of value to others seeking to adopt a structured handoff curriculum or to develop large-scale curricular innovations that involve redesigning firmly established processes. These lessons include the importance of approaching curricular implementation as a transformational change effort, assembling a diverse team of junior and senior faculty to provide opportunities for mentoring and professional development, and linking the educational intervention with the direct measurement of patient outcomes.