The mobile vaccine equity enhancement program-a model program for enhancing equity in vaccine availability based at a large health care system.

The SARS CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic presented unprecedented challenges as communities attempted to respond to the administration of a novel vaccine that faced cold chain logistical requirements and vaccine hesitancy among many, as well as complicated phased rollout plans that changed frequently as availability of the vaccine waxed and waned. The COVID-19 pandemic also disproportionately affected communities of color and communities with barriers to accessing healthcare. In the setting of these difficulties, a program was created specifically to address inequity in vaccine administration with a focus on communities of color and linguistic diversity as well as those who had technological barriers to online sign-up processes common at mass vaccination sites. This effort, the Mobile Vaccine Equity Enhancement Program (MVeeP), delivered over 12,000 vaccines in 24 months through a reproducible set of practices that can inform equity-driven vaccine efforts in future pandemics.

Implications of an inpatient warfarin dosing nomogram on safety outcomes post-discharge.

Many hospitals have implemented warfarin dosing nomograms to improve patient safety. To our knowledge, no study has assessed the impact inpatient warfarin initiation has in both medical and surgical patients, on safety outcomes post discharge. To evaluate the impact of a suggested institutional nomogram for the initiation of warfarin, the primary endpoint was the incidence of bleeding throughout follow up. Secondary endpoints included the composite of INR changes ≥0.5/day and INR >4. Patients were followed for a period of 2 weeks post-discharge. The composite endpoint was evaluated for an effect on reaching therapeutic INR, time to reach therapeutic INR, and bleeding events throughout follow up. A single center retrospective study comparing the safety of adherence vs. non-adherence to a warfarin nomogram. A total of 206 patients were included, 73 patients in the nomogram adherence vs. 133 in the nonadherence arm. There was no difference in the proportion of patients who bled throughout the follow up period, adherence 9.6% vs. nonadherence to the nomogram 13.5%, p = 0.407. There was however a statistical difference in the mean total number of bleeding events, 0.096 (7/73) in the adherence vs. 0.158 (21/133) in the non-adherence arm, p = 0.022. There was also no difference in the composite endpoint, 19.2% in the adherence vs. 28.6% in the non-adherence arm p = 0.180. A positive correlation between the inpatient composite and risk of bleeding throughout follow up was noted. The findings of this study support adherence to the nomogram as opposed to non-adherence.

Measuring Harm in Health Care: Optimizing Adverse Event Review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify modifiable factors that improve the reliability of ratings of severity of health care-associated harm in clinical practice improvement and research. METHODS: A diverse group of clinicians rated 8 types of adverse events: blood product, device or medical/surgical supply, fall, health care-associated infection, medication, perinatal, pressure ulcer, surgery. We used a generalizability theory framework to estimate the impact of number of raters, rater experience, and rater provider type on reliability. RESULTS: Pharmacists were slightly more precise and consistent in their ratings than either physicians or nurses. For example, to achieve high reliability of 0.83, 3 physicians could be replaced by 2 pharmacists without loss in precision of measurement. If only 1 rater was available for rating, ∼5% of the reviews for severe harm would have been incorrectly categorized. Reliability was greatly improved with 2 reviewers. CONCLUSIONS: We identified factors that influence the reliability of clinician reviews of health care-associated harm. Our novel use of generalizability analyses improved our understanding of how differences affect reliability. This approach was useful in optimizing resource utilization when selecting raters to assess harm and may have similar applications in other settings in health care.

The physician quality officer model: 5-year follow-up.

Physician engagement is a key element of health care quality improvement. Challenges include competing demands, inconsistent compensation, knowledge deficits, and lack of mentorship and role modeling. To help address these obstacles, UMass Memorial Medical Center developed a physician quality officer (PQO) program in 2007. Since its inception, several elements of the program have changed, including PQO roles in projects, approaches to training, logistics of group communication, the role of PQOs in medical staff education, and the PQO compensation model.

Home medication support for childhood cancer: family-centered design and testing.

PURPOSE: Errors in the use of medications at home by children with cancer are common, and interventions to support correct use are needed. We sought to (1) engage stakeholders in the design and development of an intervention to prevent errors in home medication use, and (2) evaluate the acceptability and usefulness of the intervention. METHODS: We convened a multidisciplinary team of parents, clinicians, technology experts, and researchers to develop an intervention using a two-step user-centered design process. First, parents and oncologists provided input on the design. Second, a parent panel and two oncology nurses refined draft materials. In a feasibility study, we used questionnaires to assess usefulness and acceptability. Medication error rates were assessed via monthly telephone interviews with parents. RESULTS: We successfully partnered with parents, clinicians, and IT experts to develop Home Medication Support (HoMeS), a family-centered Web-based intervention. HoMeS includes a medication calendar with decision support, a communication tool, adverse effect information, a metric conversion chart, and other information. The 15 families in the feasibility study gave HoMeS high ratings for acceptability and usefulness. Half recorded information on the calendar to indicate to other caregivers that doses were given; 34% brought it to the clinic to communicate with their clinician about home medication use. There was no change in the rate of medication errors in this feasibility study. CONCLUSION: We created and tested a stakeholder-designed, Web-based intervention to support home chemotherapy use, which parents rated highly. This tool may prevent serious medication errors in a larger study.

Composite model for profiling physicians across domains of care.

Physician profiling methods are envisioned as a means of promoting healthcare quality by recognizing the contributions of individual physicians. Developing methods that can reliably distinguish among physicians' performance is challenging because of small sample sizes, incomplete data, and physician panel differences. In this study, we developed a hierarchical, weighted composite model to reliably compare primary care physicians across domains of care, and we demonstrated its use within a clinical system. We evaluated 199 primary care physicians from a large integrated healthcare delivery system using 19 quality and two efficiency measures taken from the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set and existing pay-for-performance programs. Individual measures were calculated, compared to benchmarks, and grouped into two composites: one focused on quality and one on efficiency. Each composite was fitted to the model, assessed for reliability (signal-to-noise ratio), and weighted to create a single summary score for each primary care physician. The quality-of-care composite had a median reliability of .98, with 99.5% of all physician reliability estimates exceeding threshold. The efficiency composite had a median reliability of .97, with 94.9% of all physician reliability estimates exceeding threshold. Our results demonstrate that reliable physician profiling is possible across care domains using a hierarchical composite model based on multiple data. The model was used to distribute incentive payouts among primary care physicians but is adaptable to many settings.

The "physician-led chart audit: " engaging providers in fortifying a culture of safety.

OBJECTIVES: Engaging physicians in quality and patient safety initiatives is a well-described challenge. Barriers include time constraints, lack of defined common purpose and leadership support, poorly communicated goals, and scarcity of supporting data (references 1, 2, 3).With reference to strengthening a culture of safety while meeting regulatory and performance standards, health-care systems face a difficult twin objective: educate the medical staff and its trainees and maintain high levels of compliance across inpatient, ambulatory clinic, and procedural areas.In 2010, our institution identified opportunities for improvement in physician performance related to several important patient safety standards. These issues had not been previously corrected by didactic sessions, written communication, and the chain of command. METHODS: To help address these general and site-specific problems, we developed and deployed a set of medical record audit tools entitled "physician-led audits" (PLAs). We trained providers in leadership positions to use the tools and to teach their use to others. We designed a system to capture data on frequency of use and results. The PLA process is distinctive in that it holds physicians accountable for the auditing and for follow-up afterward. RESULTS: With support from department chairs, division chiefs, residency program directors, and other leaders, close to 2000 PLAs were performed over a 10-month study period. CONCLUSIONS: The audits engaged physician leaders and the at-large medical staff, making them key participants in a system-wide improvement campaign. The tool was customized for use in a broad range of clinical settings and was widely and rapidly adopted, leading to important dialogue and a substantive contribution to our safety culture.

Impact of cardiac telemetry on patient safety and cost.

BACKGROUND: With the impetus for healthcare reform and the imperative for healthcare organizations to improve efficiency and reduce waste, it is valuable to examine high-volume procedures and practices in order to identify potential overuse. At the same time, organizations must ensure that improved efficiency does not inadvertently reduce patient safety. METHODS: We undertook a multicenter analysis of the use of adult cardiac telemetry outside of the intensive care unit or step-down units at 4 teaching hospitals to determine the percentage of monitoring days that were not justified by an accepted indication and the monetary costs associated with these nonindicated days. We also assessed the safety of eliminating monitoring on days when it was not justified by looking at the incidence of arrhythmias. RESULTS: We found that in 35% of telemetry days, telemetry use was not supported by an accepted set of clinical indications. The incidence of arrhythmias on nonindicated days was low (3.1 per 100 days of monitoring per nonindicated day),and the arrhythmias detected were clinically insignificant. Eliminating monitoring on nonindicated days could save a minimum of $53 per patient per day. The average 400-bed hospital with a conservative estimate of 5000 nonindicated patientdays per year could save $250,000 per year. CONCLUSION: Reducing the use of telemetry on nonindicated days may provide an opportunity for institutions to safely reduce cost as well as staff time and effort, while maintaining and potentially increasing patient safety.

Mortality rates as a measure of quality and safety, "caveat emptor".

The objective of this study was to demonstrate the impact of a single ICD-9 (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Version 9) code on the observed-to-expected mortality ratios for acute care hospitals, calculated using administrative data. The study was a retrospective analysis of mortality data and prospective measurement of the impact of a change in coding on expected mortality rates. Measurement included overall mortality observed-to-expected mortality index for 2 hospitals and rate of use of the palliative care ICD-9 code. The main result was that both retrospective and prospective applications of this single ICD-9 code significantly reduced observed-to-expected mortality ratios. Both regulators and hospitals need to be aware of the impact of the quality of coding on publicly reported quality and patient safety data.

Physician quality officer: a new model for engaging physicians in quality improvement.

The slow progress in health care quality improvement and patient safety in America can be attributed, in part, to the challenge of physician engagement. As multidisciplinary patient-centered care becomes the standard, it is essential to integrate physicians into this process. To this end, the UMass Memorial Medical Center redesigned its Physician Quality Officer (PQO) program in 2007. The PQOs of the UMass Memorial Medical Center, who are all practicing clinicians, are fully compensated for their time and effort, trained in safety science, and teamed with other members of the department of quality and patient safety. Over the first year of the new program, the PQOs have successfully led major hospital initiatives in areas such as surgical care improvement, critical values reporting, and medication reconciliation. In this article, the authors describe the challenges and insights in the development and implementation of this new program.