Are temporary staff associated with more severe emergency department medication errors?

The use of temporary staff in healthcare is on the rise due in part to work-force shortages and perceived cost savings. They may present an increased risk of errors from insufficient training and orientation, and less familiarity with local culture and practice. However, their impact, particularly in the emergency department where the risk of preventable medication errors is high, has not been established. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether temporary staff medication errors would be associated with more severe harm than permanent staff medication errors. We used a national Internet-based medication error reporting system (MEDMARX) and did a cross-sectional study of the dataset between the years 2000 and 2005. After adjusting for clustering by facility, temporary staff errors were more likely than permanent staff errors to reach the patient (odds ratio [OR] 1.42, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.97-2.09), require patient monitoring (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.21-3.03), result in temporary harm (OR 3.11, 95% CI 1.13-8.59), and be life-threatening (OR 8.63, 95% CI 1.22-61.0). In conclusion, emergency department medication errors associated with temporary staff were more harmful than those associated with permanent staff.

A web-based program to empower patients who have schizophrenia to discuss quality of care with mental health providers.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated a Web-based tool to help patients with schizophrenia communicate with clinicians about evidence-based treatments. METHODS: Fifty patients used an interactive Web-based intervention featuring actors simulating a patient discussing treatment concerns (intervention group; N=24) or were shown an educational video about schizophrenia treatment before an appointment for routine follow-up care (control group; N=26). The visits were recorded and analyzed by using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. RESULTS: Visits by patients in the intervention group were longer (24 versus 19 minutes, p<.05) and had a proportionately greater patient contribution to the dialogue (288 versus 229 statements, p<.05) and a smaller ratio of clinician to patient talk (1.1 versus 1.4, p<.05) compared with visits by the control group. Patients in the intervention group asked more questions about treatment (2 versus .9, p<.05), disclosed more lifestyle information (76 versus 53 statements, p<.005), and more often checked that they understood information (3.6 versus 2.1 checks, p<.05). Clinicians asked more questions about treatment (7.5 versus 5.1, p<.05) and the medical condition (7.8 versus 4.7, p<.05) to control group patients but made more statements of empathy (1.3 versus .4, p<.03) and cues of interest (48 versus 22, p<.05) with the intervention group. The patient-centeredness ratio was greater for visits by patients in the intervention group than by the control group (8.5 versus 3.2, p<.05). Patients' tone was more dominant and respectful (p<.05) and clinicians' tone was more sympathetic (p<.05) during visits by patients in the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The Web-based tool empowered persons with schizophrenia to engage more fully in a patient-centered dialogue about their treatment.

Pattern of mortality in a sample of Maryland residents with severe mental illness.

In a cohort of Maryland Medicaid recipients with severe mental illness followed from 1993-2001, we compared mortality with rates in the Maryland general population including race and gender subgroups. Persons with severe mental illness died at a mean age of 51.8 years, with a standardized mortality ratio of 3.7 (95%CI, 3.6-3.7).

Antipsychotic treatment patterns and hospitalizations among adults with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE(S): To characterize the longitudinal patterns of antipsychotic treatment and to investigate the relationship between antipsychotic treatment patterns and acute hospitalizations among adults with schizophrenia. We hypothesized that continuous antipsychotic treatment would be associated with fewer hospitalizations and shorter lengths of stay. METHOD: Seven years of retrospective Maryland Medicaid administrative data were used to examine inpatient medical encounters and outpatient psychotropic treatment in community-based settings from 1993 through 2000. The sample consisted of 1727 adults continuously enrolled in the Maryland Medicaid program from July 1992 through June 1994, and diagnosed with schizophrenia. The main outcome measures were a) any schizophrenia hospitalization; b) number of schizophrenia hospitalizations; and c) inpatient days associated with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia. RESULTS: The average duration of antipsychotic use was six months in any single year and four and one-half years across the entire study period. Compared to individuals with a more continuous pattern of antipsychotic treatment, individuals with moderate or light use had odds of hospitalization for schizophrenia that were 52 or 72% greater (95%CI: 30-75% greater, 49-100% greater respectively). Light users of antipsychotics have an average length of stay per hospitalization that is approximately 20% longer than the average for continuous users (95%CI: 2-39% longer). CONCLUSIONS: Findings emphasize the benefit of continuous antipsychotic treatment for individuals with schizophrenia.

Toward learning from patient safety reporting systems.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the frequency and type of factors involved in incidents reported to a patient safety reporting system and answer specific questions to enhance the value of PSRS data to improve patient safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective cohort study of incidents reported from adult and pediatric intensive care units (ICUs) in the United States to the web-based, voluntary, and anonymous Intensive Care Unit Safety Reporting System. Results from July 1, 2002, to June 30, 2004. Main outcome variables were incidents that could or did lead to patient harm. RESULTS: Analysis includes 2075 incidents from 23 ICUs. Median number of reports/ICU/month was 3; 5 hospitals submitted 58% of reports. Harm was reported in 42% of incidents with 18 deaths. Common event types: medication/therapeutics (42%) and incorrect/incomplete care delivery (20%); 48% of line/tube/drain incidents led to physical harm. Deficiencies in training/education contributed to 49% of incidents and teamwork issues 32%; 42% of incidents had 2 or more contributing factors. As the number of contributing factors per incident increased, so did risk of harm. CONCLUSIONS: The Intensive Care Unit Safety Reporting System provides a mechanism for multiple ICUs to identify hazards. Data trends show a correlation between multiple contributing factors and higher rates of harm. Further research is needed to help determine how to use PSRS data to improve patient safety.

Integrating the intensive care unit safety reporting system with existing incident reporting systems.

BACKGROUND: Voluntary incident reporting systems that identify risks can be integrated into existing hospital reporting systems and can improve patient safety. FINDINGS: A voluntary and anonymous Web-based intensive care unit safety reporting system (ICUSRS) was implemented in a cohort of intensive care units (ICUs). The reporting system was integrated into hospitals' reporting systems after the adverse event reporting structures were investigated. Reporting systems were classified as mandatory or voluntary and internal or external; the extent of formal training was identified and the trajectory of completed adverse events in the exisiting systems were tracked. Information from reported incidents was sent back monthly to the hospital ICUs through case discussions and a quarterly newsletter. RESULTS: All seven hospitals had internal reporting systems and two also used external reporting systems. In general, the majority of incident reports were completed by registered nurses and were reported to the nursing chain of command. Many of the sites had little knowledge or understanding of their existing reporting systems. CONCLUSION: Voluntary external reporting systems such as the ICUSRS hold promise for improving patient safety.

Creating the web-based intensive care unit safety reporting system.

In an effort to improve patient safety, researchers at the Johns Hopkins University designed and implemented a comprehensive Web-based Intensive Care Unit Safety Reporting System (ICUSRS). The ICUSRS collects data about adverse events and near misses from all staff in the ICU. This report reflects data on 854 reports from 18 diverse ICUs across the United States. Reporting is voluntary, and data collected is confidential, with patient, provider, and reporter information deidentified. Preliminary data include system factors reported, degree of patient harm, reporting times, and evaluations of the system. Qualitative and quantitative data are reported back to the ICU site study teams and frontline staff through monthly reports, case discussions, and a quarterly newsletter.