Investigating Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Maternal Care at the System Level Using Patient Safety Incident Reports.

BACKGROUND: Maternal mortality in the United States is high, and women and birthing people of color experience higher rates of mortality and severe maternal morbidity (SMM). More than half of maternal deaths and cases of SMM are considered preventable. The research presented here investigated systems issues contributing to adverse outcomes and racial/ethnic disparities in maternal care using patient safety incident reports. METHODS: The authors reviewed incidents reported in the labor and delivery unit (L&D) and the antepartum and postpartum unit (A&P) of a large academic hospital in 2019 and 2020. Deliveries associated with a reported incident were described by race/ethnicity, age group, method of delivery, and several other process variables. Differences across racial/ethnic group were statistically evaluated. RESULTS: Almost two thirds (64.8%) of the 528 reports analyzed were reported in L&D, and 35.2% were reported in A&P. Non-Hispanic white (NHW) patients accounted for 43.9% of reported incidents, non-Hispanic Black (NHB) patients accounted for 43.2%, Hispanic patients accounted for 8.9%, and patients categorized as "other" accounted for 4.0%. NHB patients were disproportionally represented in the incident reports, as they accounted for only 36.5% of the underlying birthing population. The odds ratio (OR) demonstrated a higher risk of a reported adverse incident for NHB patients; however, adjustment for cesarean section attenuated the association (OR 1.25, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.54). CONCLUSION: Greater integration of patient safety and health equity efforts in hospitals are needed to promptly identify and alleviate racial and ethnic disparities in maternal health outcomes. Although additional systems analysis is necessary, the authors offer recommendations to support safer, more equitable maternal care.

Racial and ethnic disparities in long-term contraception use among the birthing population at an academic hospital in the Southeastern United States.

Ensuring women and birthing people have access to the contraceptive of their choice is essential for patient-centered care, health equity, and reproductive justice. While trends in national data in the United States reveal racial disparities in long-term contraceptive use, health-system and hospital-level investigations are essential to understand disparities and encourage interventions. We used data from 5011 patients who delivered at a large academic hospital to determine the effect of race/ethnicity and social vulnerability index (SVI) on the odds of undergoing a long-term contraceptive procedure. Results indicate that SVI substantially affects the odds of long-term contraception for non-Hispanic White women and birthing people. In contrast, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black women and birthing people have significantly higher odds of undergoing a long-term contraceptive procedure due to race/ethnicity. Contributions to these disparities may be based on factors including healthcare providers, organizational and external policies. Interventions at all levels of care are essential to address disparities in contraceptive care, outcomes, and patient experience.

Morbidity, mortality, and systems safety in non-operating room anaesthesia: a narrative review.

Non-operating room anaesthesia (NORA) describes anaesthesia delivered outside a traditional operating room (OR) setting. Non-operating room anaesthesia cases have increased significantly in the last 20 yr and are projected to account for half of all anaesthetics delivered in the next decade. In contrast to most other medication administration contexts, NORA is performed in high-volume fast-paced environments not optimised for anaesthesia care. These predisposing factors combined with increasing case volume, less provider experience, and higher-acuity patients increase the potential for preventable adverse events. Our narrative review examines morbidity and mortality in NORA settings compared with the OR and the systems factors impacting safety in NORA. A review of the literature from January 1, 1994 to March 5, 2021 was conducted using PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and ProQuest. After completing abstract screening and full-text review, 30 articles were selected for inclusion. These articles suggested higher rates of morbidity and mortality in NORA cases compared with OR cases. This included a higher proportion of death claims and complications attributable to inadequate oxygenation, and a higher likelihood that adverse events are preventable. Despite relatively few attempts to quantify safety concerns, it was possible to find a range of systems safety concerns repeated across multiple studies, including insufficient lighting, noise, cramped workspace, and restricted access to patients. Old and unfamiliar equipment, lack of team familiarity, and limited preoperative evaluation are also commonly noted challenges. Applying a systems view of safety, it is possible to suggest a range of methods to improve NORA safety and performance.

Using Flow Disruptions to Examine System Safety in Robotic-Assisted Surgery: Protocol for a Stepped Wedge Crossover Design.

BACKGROUND: The integration of high technology into health care systems is intended to provide new treatment options and improve the quality, safety, and efficiency of care. Robotic-assisted surgery is an example of high technology integration in health care, which has become ubiquitous in many surgical disciplines. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to understand and measure current robotic-assisted surgery processes in a systematic, quantitative, and replicable manner to identify latent systemic threats and opportunities for improvement based on our observations and to implement and evaluate interventions. This 5-year study will follow a human factors engineering approach to improve the safety and efficiency of robotic-assisted surgery across 4 US hospitals. METHODS: The study uses a stepped wedge crossover design with 3 interventions, introduced in different sequences at each of the hospitals over four 8-month phases. Robotic-assisted surgery procedures will be observed in the following specialties: urogynecology, gynecology, urology, bariatrics, general, and colorectal. We will use the data collected from observations, surveys, and interviews to inform interventions focused on teamwork, task design, and workplace design. We intend to evaluate attitudes toward each intervention, safety culture, subjective workload for each case, effectiveness of each intervention (including through direct observation of a sample of surgeries in each observational phase), operating room duration, length of stay, and patient safety incident reports. Analytic methods will include statistical data analysis, point process analysis, and thematic content analysis. RESULTS: The study was funded in September 2018 and approved by the institutional review board of each institution in May and June of 2019 (CSMC and MDRH: Pro00056245; VCMC: STUDY 270; MUSC: Pro00088741). After refining the 3 interventions in phase 1, data collection for phase 2 (baseline data) began in November 2019 and was scheduled to continue through June 2020. However, data collection was suspended in March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We collected a total of 65 observations across the 4 sites before the pandemic. Data collection for phase 2 was resumed in October 2020 at 2 of the 4 sites. CONCLUSIONS: This will be the largest direct observational study of surgery ever conducted with data collected on 680 robotic surgery procedures at 4 different institutions. The proposed interventions will be evaluated using individual-level (workload and attitude), process-level (perioperative duration and flow disruption), and organizational-level (safety culture and complications) measures. An implementation science framework is also used to investigate the causes of success or failure of each intervention at each site and understand the potential spread of the interventions. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/25284.

Learning in simulated environments: An assessment of 4-week retention outcomes.

Simulations offer the benefits of a safer and more accessible learning environment, where learners can practice until the point of proficiency. While research into the effectiveness of simulations as learning tools has found tangible benefits, fewer studies have examined retention and differences between high and low fidelity simulations. This research sought to supplement the literature in this domain by investigating whether participants who learned to construct an electrical circuit using a 2D or 3D breadboard simulation could achieve comparable learning, transfer, and retention outcomes to those who learned using a physical breadboard. The influence of learner characteristics - cognitive ability and goal orientation - were also evaluated. This study had two parts: a cross-sectional portion that examined learning and transfer outcomes and a longitudinal portion that examined retention outcomes after a 2 and 4-week period. The cross-sectional analysis included 70 participants and the longitudinal analysis included 40 participants. The results found that the physical fidelity of the learning environment significantly impacted several transfer outcomes (construction and construction time) but not retention outcomes. Cognitive ability was a significant predictor of learning (gain score, circuit design score) and retention (posttest scores, construction time) outcomes. Learning goal orientation significantly predicted circuit construction over time and measurement occasion significantly predicted posttest scores and interacted with fidelity to predict circuit design score. The study demonstrated that simulated environments can lead to comparable, or better, proficiency than physical environments. These findings have implications for the design and implementation of simulated environments, specifically for courses delivered in an online setting.