The Joint Commission's Ongoing Professional Practice Evaluation Process: Costly, Ineffective, and Potentially Harmful to Safety Culture.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the estimated labor costs and effectiveness of Ongoing Professional Practice Evaluation (OPPE) processes at identifying outlier performers in a large sample of providers across multiple health care systems and to extrapolate costs and effectiveness nationally. METHODS: Six hospital systems partnered to evaluate their labor expenses related to conducting OPPE. Estimates for mean labor hours and wages were created for the following: data analysts, medical staff office professionals, department physician leaders, and administrative assistants. The total number of outlier performers who were identified by OPPE metrics alone and that resulted in lack of renewal, limitation, or revoking of hospital privileges during the past annual OPPE cycle (2022) was recorded. National costs of OPPE were extrapolated. Literature review of the effect of OPPE on safety culture in radiology was performed. RESULTS: The evaluated systems had 12,854 privileged providers evaluated by OPPE. The total estimated annual recurring labor cost per provider was $50.20. Zero of 12,854 providers evaluated were identified as outlier performers solely through the OPPE process. The total estimated annual recurring cost of administering OPPE nationally was $78.54 million. In radiology over the past 15 years, the use of error rates based on score-based peer review as an OPPE metric has been perceived as punitive and had an adverse effect on safety culture. CONCLUSION: OPPE is expensive to administer, inefficient at identifying outlier performers, diverts human resources away from potentially more effective improvement work, and has been associated with an adverse impact on safety culture in radiology.

Serious Experience Events: Applying Patient Safety Concepts to Improve Patient Experience.

Pediatric healthcare systems have successfully decreased patient harm and improved patient safety by adopting standardized definitions, processes, and infrastructure for serious safety events (SSEs). We have adopted those patient safety concepts and used that infrastructure to identify and create action plans to mitigate events in which patient experience is severely compromised. We define those events as serious experience events (SEEs). The purpose of this research brief is to describe SEE definitions, infrastructure used to evaluate potential SEEs, and creation of action plans as well as share our preliminary experiences with the approach.

The approach to improving patient experience at children's hospitals: a primer for pediatric radiologists.

Increasing attention is being given to improving patient experience in health care. Most children's hospitals have a patient experience office or team that champions and measures patient experience and partners with operations to optimize performance in this area. We outline the activities that our patient experience team undertakes at our pediatric health system to advocate for, measure and improve the experience of our patients and families. The framework we propose for such activities includes those that are proactive in improving patient experience as well as those that are reactive to when patients and families have had a poor experience. Those reactive practices are often centered on the management of patient complaints and grievances and early intervention into patient complaints so that they do not become grievances.

Improving Communication with Primary Care Physicians at the Time of Hospital Discharge.

BACKGROUND: Communication with primary care physicians (PCPs) at the time of a patient's hospital discharge is important to safely transition care to home. The goal of this quality improvement initiative was to increase discharge communication to PCPs at an academic children's hospital. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital Stanford used Lean A3 problem solving methodology to address the problem of inadequate discharge communication with PCPs. Emphasis was placed on frontline provider (resident physicians) involvement in the improvement process, creating standards, and error proofing. Root cause analysis identified several key drivers of the problem, and successive countermeasures were implemented beginning in August 2013 aimed at achieving the target of 80% attempted verbal communication within seven days before or after (usually 24-48 hours) on the pediatric medical services. Run charts were generated tracking the outcome of PCP communication. RESULTS: On the pediatric medical services, the goal of 80% communication was met and sustained during a seven-month period starting October 2013, a statistically significant improvement. In the eight months prior to October 2013, hospitalwide PCP communication prior to discharge averaged 59.1% (n = 5,397) and improved to 76.7% (n = 4,870) in the seven months after (p <0.001). Fifteen of 19 specialty services had a significant increase in discharge communication after October 2013. CONCLUSION: Lean improvement methodology (including structured problem solving using A3 thinking), intensive frontline provider involvement, and process-oriented electronic health record work flow redesign led to increased verbal PCP communication at around the time of a patient's discharge.

Safety analysis of proposed data-driven physiologic alarm parameters for hospitalized children.

INTRODUCTION: Modification of alarm limits is one approach to mitigating alarm fatigue. We aimed to create and validate heart rate (HR) and respiratory rate (RR) percentiles for hospitalized children, and analyze the safety of replacing current vital sign reference ranges with proposed data-driven, age-stratified 5th and 95th percentile values. METHODS: In this retrospective cross-sectional study, nurse-charted HR and RR data from a training set of 7202 hospitalized children were used to develop percentile tables. We compared 5th and 95th percentile values with currently accepted reference ranges in a validation set of 2287 patients. We analyzed 148 rapid response team (RRT) and cardiorespiratory arrest (CRA) events over a 12-month period, using HR and RR values in the 12 hours prior to the event, to determine the proportion of patients with out-of-range vitals based upon reference versus data-driven limits. RESULTS: There were 24,045 (55.6%) fewer out-of-range measurements using data-driven vital sign limits. Overall, 144/148 RRT and CRA patients had out-of-range HR or RR values preceding the event using current limits, and 138/148 were abnormal using data-driven limits. Chart review of RRT and CRA patients with abnormal HR and RR per current limits considered normal by data-driven limits revealed that clinical status change was identified by other vital sign abnormalities or clinical context. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of vital signs in hospitalized children are outside presently used norms. Safety evaluation of data-driven limits suggests they are as safe as those currently used. Implementation of these parameters in physiologic monitors may mitigate alarm fatigue. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2015;11:817-823. © 2015 Society of Hospital Medicine.

Better health, less spending: Redesigning the transition from pediatric to adult healthcare for youth with chronic illness.

Adolescents and young adults (AYA) with serious chronic illnesses face costly and dangerous gaps in care as they transition from pediatric to adult health systems. New, financially sustainable approaches to transition are needed to close these gaps. We designed a new transition model for adolescents and young adults with a variety of serious chronic conditions. Our explicit goal was to build a model that would improve the value of care for youth 15-25 years of age undergoing this transition. The design process incorporated a review, analysis, and synthesis of relevant clinical and health services research; stakeholder interviews; and observations of high-performing healthcare systems. We identified three major categories of solutions for a safer and lower cost transition to adult care: (1) building and supporting self-management during the critical transition; (2) engaging receiving care; and (3) providing checklist-driven guide services during the transition. We propose that implementation of a program with these interventions would have a positive impact on all three domains of the triple aim - improving health, improving the experience of care, and reducing per capita healthcare cost. The transition model provides a general framework as well as suggestions for specific interventions. Pilot tests to assess the model's ease of implementation, clinical effects, and financial impact are currently underway.