Perceived Value of the Daily Safety Briefing.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A hospital-level daily safety briefing (DSB) is a time for leaders to come together and address recent and upcoming safety challenges in the hospital. As tools to facilitate communication and teamwork, DSBs are important, but their value has not been extensively studied. We studied the value of the DSB by means of a prospective written survey of participants of the DSB at an urban academic medical center. Participants were unit managers, directors, vice presidents, and various other hospital leaders.Ninety-seven of 114 participants completed the survey (85%). Of all the activities rated, preprocedural time-outs had the highest rating in terms of impact on patient safety (4.87 ± 0.50 on 5-point Likert scale). The DSB had a rating (4.44 ± 0.77) that was on par with The Joint Commission accreditation activities (4.47 ± 0.68) and higher than use of the Morse Fall Scale (4.10 ± 0.83). Overall, 95% of the participants felt that a DSB was an effective use of participants' time. The top two benefits of the DSB were keeping patient safety a focal point in the organization (4.54 ± 0.74) and increasing awareness about patient safety issues (4.52 ± 0.93).We conclude that the DSB improves communication among team members and is a valuable use of healthcare leaders' time.

Statewide Collaborative to Reduce Surgical Site Infections: Results of the Hawaii Surgical Unit-Based Safety Program.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSIs) after colorectal surgery are common, lead to patient harm, and are costly to the healthcare system. This study's purpose was to evaluate the effectiveness of the AHRQ Safety Program for Surgery in Hawaii. STUDY DESIGN: This pre-post cohort study involved 100% of 15 hospitals in Hawaii from January 2013 through June 2015. The intervention was a statewide implementation of the Comprehensive Unit-Based Safety Program and individualized bundles of interventions to reduce SSIs. Primary end point was colorectal SSIs. Secondary end point was safety culture measured by the AHRQ Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture. RESULTS: The most common interventions implemented were reliable chlorhexidine wash, wipe before operation, and surgical preparation; appropriate antibiotic choice, dose, and timing; standardized post-surgical debriefing; and differentiating clean-dirty-clean with anastomosis tray and closing tray. From January 2013 (quarter 1) through June 2015 (quarter 2), the collaborative colorectal SSI rate decreased (from 12.08% to 4.63%; p < 0.01). The SSI rate exhibited a linear decrease during the 10-quarter period (p = 0.005). Safety culture increased in 10 of 12 domains: Overall Perception/Patient Safety (from 49% to 53%); Teamwork Across Units (from 49% to 54%); Management-Support Patient Safety (from 53% to 60%); Nonpunitive Response to Error (from 36% to 40%); Communication Openness (from 50% to 55%); Frequency of Events Reported (from 51% to 60%); Feedback/Communication about Error (from 52% to 59%); Organizational Learning/Continuous Improvement (from 59% to 70%); Supervisor/Manager Expectations and Actions Promoting Safety (from 58% to 64%); and Teamwork Within Units (from 68% to 75%) (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Participation in the national AHRQ Safety Program for Surgery in the state of Hawaii was associated with a 61.7% decrease in colorectal SSI rate and an increase in patient safety culture.

Reducing preventable harm: observations on minimizing bloodstream infections.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a practical framework that health care organizations could use to decrease preventable healthcare-acquired harms. Design/methodology/approach An existing theory of how hospitals succeeded in reducing rates of central line-associated bloodstream infections was refined, drawing from the literature and experiences in facilitating improvement efforts in thousands of hospitals in and outside the USA. Findings The following common interventions were implemented by hospitals able to reduce and sustain low infection rates. Hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) leaders demonstrated and vocalized their commitment to the goal of zero preventable harm. Also, leaders created an enabling infrastructure in the way of a coordinating team to support the improvement work to prevent infections. The team of hospital quality improvement and infection prevention staff provided project management, analytics, improvement science support, and expertise on evidence-based infection prevention practices. A third intervention assembled Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program teams in ICUs to foster local ownership of the improvement work. The coordinating team also linked unit-based safety teams in and across hospital organizations to form clinical communities to share information and disseminate effective solutions. Practical implications This framework is a feasible approach to drive local efforts to reduce bloodstream infections and other preventable healthcare-acquired harms. Originality/value Implementing this framework could decrease the significant morbidity, mortality, and costs associated with preventable harms.

Pediatric Emergency Department Return: A Literature Review of Risk Factors and Interventions.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Children discharged from emergency departments (EDs) are often at risk for ED return. The objective was to identify risk factors and interventions to mitigate or prevent ED return among this patient population. METHODS: Structured literature review of PubMed and clinicaltrials.gov was conducted to identify relevant studies. Inclusion criteria were studies evaluating ED returns by identifying risk factors and interventions in the pediatric population. Emergency department return was defined as returning to the ED within 1 year after initial visit. Abstract and full text articles were reviewed, and data were abstracted by 2 independent authors. RESULTS: A total of 963 articles were screened and yielded 42 potential relevant articles involving pediatric population. After full text review, a total of 12 articles were included in the final analysis (6 on risk factors and 6 on interventions). Risk factors for pediatric ED return included behavioral/psychiatric problems, younger age, acuity of illness, medical history of asthma, and social factors. Interventions included computer-generated instructions, postdischarge telephone coaching, ED-made appointments, case management, and home environment intervention. Emergency department-made appointments and postdischarge telephone coaching plus monetary incentive improved outpatient follow-up rate but not ED return. Home environment assessment coupled with case management reduced ED returns specifically among asthma patients. CONCLUSIONS: Several patient and visit characteristics can help predict children at risk for ED return. Although some interventions are successful at improving postdischarge follow-up, most did not reduce ED returns.

Surgical site infection: comparing surgeon versus patient self-report.

BACKGROUND: To compare the rate of surgical site infection (SSI) using surgeon versus patient report. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective observational study of surgical patients in four hospitals within one private health-care system was performed. Surgeon report consisted of contacting the surgeon or staff 30 d after procedure to identify infections. Patient report consisted of telephone contact with the patient and confirmation of infections by a trained surgical clinical reviewer. RESULTS: Between February 2011 and June 2012, there were 2853 surgical procedures that met inclusion criteria. Surgeon-reported SSI rate was significantly lower (2.4%, P value < 0.01) compared with patient self-report (4.3%). The rate was lower across most infection subtypes (1.3% versus 3.0% superficial, 0.3% versus 0.5% organ/space) except deep incisional, most procedure types (2.3% versus 4.4% general surgery) except plastics, most patient characteristics (except body mass index < 18.5), and all hospitals. There were disagreements in 3.4% of cases; 74 cases reported by patients but not surgeons and 21 cases vice versa. Disagreements were more likely in superficial infections (59.8% versus 1.0%), C-sections (22.7% versus 17.7%), hospital A (22.7% versus 17.7%), age < 65 y (74.2% versus 68.3%), and body mass index ≥ 30 (54.2% versus 39.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Patient report is a more sensitive method of detection of SSI compared with surgeon report, resulting in nearly twice the SSI rate. Fair and consistent ways of identifying SSIs are essential for comparing hospitals and surgeons, locally and nationally.

CLABSI Conversations: Lessons From Peer-to-Peer Assessments to Reduce Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections.

A national collaborative helped many hospitals dramatically reduce central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs), but some hospitals struggled to reduce infection rates. This article describes the development of a peer-to-peer assessment process (CLABSI Conversations) and the practical, actionable practices we discovered that helped intensive care unit teams achieve a CLABSI rate of less than 1 infection per 1000 catheter-days for at least 1 year. CLABSI Conversations was designed as a learning-oriented process, in which a team of peers visited hospitals to surface barriers to infection prevention and to share best practices and insights from successful intensive care units. Common practices led to 10 recommendations: executive and board leaders communicate the goal of zero CLABSI throughout the hospital; senior and unit-level leaders hold themselves accountable for CLABSI rates; unit physicians and nurse leaders own the problem; clinical leaders and infection preventionists build infection prevention training and simulation programs; infection preventionists participate in unit-based CLABSI reduction efforts; hospital managers make compliance with best practices easy; clinical leaders standardize the hospital's catheter insertion and maintenance practices and empower nurses to stop any potentially harmful acts; unit leaders and infection preventionists investigate CLABSIs to identify root causes; and unit nurses and staff audit catheter maintenance policies and practices.

Ventilator-Related Adverse Events: A Taxonomy and Findings From 3 Incident Reporting Systems.

BACKGROUND: In 2009, researchers from Johns Hopkins University's Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality; public agencies, including the FDA; and private partners, including the Emergency Care Research Institute and the University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC) Safety Intelligence Patient Safety Organization, sought to form a public-private partnership for the promotion of patient safety (P5S) to advance patient safety through voluntary partnerships. The study objective was to test the concept of the P5S to advance our understanding of safety issues related to ventilator events, to develop a common classification system for categorizing adverse events related to mechanical ventilators, and to perform a comparison of adverse events across different adverse event reporting systems. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of ventilator-related adverse events reported in 2012 from the following incident reporting systems: the Pennsylvania Patient Safety Authority's Patient Safety Reporting System, UHC's Safety Intelligence Patient Safety Organization database, and the FDA's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database. Once each organization had its dataset of ventilator-related adverse events, reviewers read the narrative descriptions of each event and classified it according to the developed common taxonomy. RESULTS: A Pennsylvania Patient Safety Authority, FDA, and UHC search provided 252, 274, and 700 relevant reports, respectively. The 3 event types most commonly reported to the UHC and the Pennsylvania Patient Safety Authority's Patient Safety Reporting System databases were airway/breathing circuit issue, human factor issues, and ventilator malfunction events. The top 3 event types reported to the FDA were ventilator malfunction, power source issue, and alarm failure. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found that (1) through the development of a common taxonomy, adverse events from 3 reporting systems can be evaluated, (2) the types of events reported in each database were related to the purpose of the database and the source of the reports, resulting in significant differences in reported event categories across the 3 systems, and (3) a public-private collaboration for investigating ventilator-related adverse events under the P5S model is feasible.

Predicting Which Patients will Likely Benefit from Subglottic Secretion Drainage Endotracheal Tubes: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Subglottic secretion drainage endotracheal tubes (SSD ETTs) have been shown to decrease ventilator-associated pneumonia and are recommended for patients intubated > 48 h or 72 h. However, it is difficult to determine which patients will be intubated > 48 h or 72 h at the time of intubation. OBJECTIVE: We attempted to determine which patient characteristics were associated with intubations ≥ 48 h or 72 h in order to guide proper placement of SSD ETTs. METHODS: The medical records of 2,159 ventilated patients at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed for intubation duration, age, sex, race, body mass index, weight, intubation reason, whether the intubation was emergent, operative status, intensive care unit (ICU) diagnosis, intubation location, ICU location, comorbidities (e.g., congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, coronary artery disease, dementia, and liver disease), acute kidney injury (AKI), and chronic renal injury. A multivariate regression analysis was then performed with all reliable data. RESULTS: The following were associated with intubation ≥ 48 h: neuroscience critical care unit (NCCU) admission (risk ratio [RR] = 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-2.56), emergent intubation (RR = 1.97; 95% 1.28-3.03), comorbid dementia (RR = 2.31; 95% 1.28-4.18), nonoperative intubation (RR = 1.77; 95% 1.28-4.18), and AKI (RR = 3.32; 95% 2.56-4.3). The following were independently associated with intubation ≥ 72 h: NCCU admission (RR = 2.2; 95 CI 1.57-3.08), nonoperative intubation (RR = 3.38; 95% CI 2.63-4.35), comorbid dementia (RR = 3.03; 95% CI 1.67-5.48), and AKI (RR = 3.11; 95% CI 2.38-4.07). CONCLUSION: Nonoperative intubation, emergent intubation, history of dementia, admission to NCCU and AKI all appear to be independently associated with increased RRs for either ≥ 48 h or 72 h of ventilation.

A Tool for the Concise Analysis of Patient Safety Incidents.

BACKGROUND: Patient safety incidents, sometimes referred to as adverse events, incidents, or patient safety events, are too common an occurrence in health care. Most methods for incident analysis are time and labor intensive. Given the significant resource requirements of a root cause analysis, for example, there is a need for a more targeted and efficient method of analyzing a larger number of incidents. Although several concise incident analysis tools are in existence, there are no published studies regarding their usability or effectiveness. METHODS: Building on previous efforts, a Concise Incident Analysis (CIA) methodology and tool were developed to facilitate analysis of no- or low-harm incidents. Staff from 11 hospitals in five countries-Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, India, and the United States-pilot tested the tool in two phases. The tool was evaluated and refined after each phase on the basis of user perceptions of usability and effectiveness. RESULTS: From September 2013 through January 2014, 52 patient safety incidents were analyzed. A broad variety of incident types were investigated, the most frequent being patient falls (25%). Incidents came from a variety of hospital work areas, the most frequent being from the medical ward (37%). Most incidents investigated resulted in temporary harm or no harm (94%). All or most sites found the tool "understandable" (100%), "easy to use" (89%), and "effective" (89%). Some 95% of participants planned to continue to use all or some parts of the tool after the pilot. Qualitative feedback suggested that the tool allowed analysis of incidents that were not currently being analyzed because of insufficient resources. The tool was described as simple to use, easy to document, and aligned with the flow of the incident analysis. CONCLUSION: A concise tool for the investigation of patient safety incidents with low or no harm was well accepted across a select group of hospitals from five countries.

The prevalence of long QT interval in post-operative intensive care unit patients.

The severity of patient illnesses and medication complexity in post-operative critically ill patients increase the risk for a prolonged QT interval. We determined the prevalence of prolonged QTc in surgical intensive care unit (SICU) patients. We performed a prospective cross-sectional study over a 15-month period at a major academic center. SICU pre-admission and admission EKGs, patient demographics, and laboratory values were analyzed. QTc was evaluated as both a continuous and dichotomous outcome (prolonged QTc > 440 ms). 281 patients were included in the study: 92 % (n = 257) post-operative and 8 % (n = 24) non-operative. On pre-admission EKGs, 32 % of the post-operative group and 42 % of the non-operative group had prolonged QTc (p = 0.25); on post-admission EKGs, 67 % of the post-operative group but only 33 % of the non-operative group had prolonged QTc (p < 0.01). The average change in QTc in the post-operative group was +30.7 ms, as compared to +2 ms in the non-operative group (p < 0.01). On multivariable adjustment for long QTc as a dichotomous outcome, pre-admission prolonged QTc (OR 3.93, CI 1.93-8.00) and having had an operative procedure (OR 4.04, CI 1.67-9.83) were associated with developing prolonged QTc. For QTc as a continuous outcome, intra-operative beta-blocker use was associated with a statistically-significant decrease in QTc duration. None of the patients developed a lethal arrhythmia in the ICU. Prolonged QTc is common among post-operative SICU patients (67 %), however lethal arrhythmias are uncommon. The operative experience increases the risk for long QTc.

Effect of altering alarm settings: a randomized controlled study.

UNLABELLED: Medical alarm signals are important for alerting clinicians to life-threatening conditions, but the high rate of false alarms can be problematic. Reduction in alarm signals may lead to increased staff responsiveness to alarms and create a quieter environment for patients. The effect of these changes on patient outcomes is uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a pilot, prospective, randomized, controlled trial in the cardiac care unit (CCU) to test a study protocol and data collection instruments and to examine the differences in alarms between usual care and altered settings. Subjects were randomized daily to either standard or altered CCU alarm settings. Secondary outcomes included the number of clinically significant events (CSEs) detected, event-triggered interventions (ETIs), frequency of alarms per monitored bed, and patient complications. RESULTS: Over the two-week study time frame, 22 unique patients were enrolled. There were 1,710 alarms over 163 hours of monitoring in the standard group and 1,165 alarms over 169 hours in the study group (P < 0.001). There were more CSEs detected (14 vs. 3) and ETIs (12 vs. 2) in the study group, but sample size was too small to determine efficacy. No cardiac arrests or adverse patient outcomes were observed in either group. All patients were discharged from the hospital. Study protocol and outcomes were feasible and lessons were learned. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated feasibility of a study protocol for conducting a randomized controlled trial to evaluate CSEs, ETIs, frequency of alarms, and adverse patient outcomes when altering default alarm settings. A longer study can be performed using a similar study design.

On the CUSP: Stop BSI: evaluating the relationship between central line-associated bloodstream infection rate and patient safety climate profile.

BACKGROUND: Central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) remains one of the most common and deadly hospital acquired infections in the United States. Creating a culture of safety is an important part of healthcare-associated infection improvement efforts; however, few studies have robustly examined the role of safety climate in patient safety outcomes. We applied a pattern-based approach to measuring safety climate to investigate the relationship between intensive care unit (ICU) patient safety climate profiles and CLABSI rates. METHODS: Secondary analyses of data collected from 237 adult ICUs participating in the On the CUSP: Stop BSI project. Unit-level baseline scores on the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety, a survey designed to assess patient safety climate, and CLABSI rates, were investigated. Three climate profile characteristics were examined: profile elevation, variability, and shape. RESULTS: Zero-inflated Poisson analyses suggested an association between the relative incidence of CLABSI and safety climate profile shape. K-means cluster analysis revealed 5 climate profile shapes. ICUs with conflicting climates and nonpunitive climates had a significantly higher CLABSI risk compared with ICUs with generative leadership climates. CONCLUSIONS: Relative CLABSI risk was related to safety climate profile shape. None of the climate profile shapes was related to the odds of reporting zero CLABSI. Our findings support using pattern-based methods for examining safety climate rather than examining the relationships between each narrow dimension of safety climate and broader safety outcomes like CLABSI.

Measuring patient safety in the emergency department.

As a safety net for the health care system, quality and safety performance in emergency medicine (EM) is important for policy makers, insurers, researchers, health care providers, and patients. Developing performance indicators that are relevant, valid, feasible, and easy to measure has proven difficult. To monitor progress, patient safety should be measured objectively. Although conceptual frameworks and error taxonomies have been proposed, a practical scorecard for measuring patient safety over time in EM has been lacking. This article proposes a framework that measures safety through 4 major domains: (1) how often patients are harmed, (2) how often appropriate interventions are delivered, (3) how well errors in the system are identified and corrected, and (4) emergency department (ED) safety culture. Examples of specific measures for each of these domains are provided, but the EM community should reach consensus on what measures are important for the ED environment and patients.