Self-monitoring of Blood Pressure in Patients With Hypertension-Related Multi-morbidity: Systematic Review and Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that self-monitoring of blood pressure (BP) is effective when combined with co-interventions, but its efficacy varies in the presence of some co-morbidities. This study examined whether self-monitoring can reduce clinic BP in patients with hypertension-related co-morbidity. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted of articles published in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to January 2018. Randomized controlled trials of self-monitoring of BP were selected and individual patient data (IPD) were requested. Contributing studies were prospectively categorized by whether they examined a low/high-intensity co-intervention. Change in BP and likelihood of uncontrolled BP at 12 months were examined according to number and type of hypertension-related co-morbidity in a one-stage IPD meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 22 trials were eligible, 16 of which were able to provide IPD for the primary outcome, including 6,522 (89%) participants with follow-up data. Self-monitoring was associated with reduced clinic systolic BP compared to usual care at 12-month follow-up, regardless of the number of hypertension-related co-morbidities (-3.12 mm Hg, [95% confidence intervals -4.78, -1.46 mm Hg]; P value for interaction with number of morbidities = 0.260). Intense interventions were more effective than low-intensity interventions in patients with obesity (P < 0.001 for all outcomes), and possibly stroke (P < 0.004 for BP control outcome only), but this effect was not observed in patients with coronary heart disease, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: Self-monitoring lowers BP regardless of the number of hypertension-related co-morbidities, but may only be effective in conditions such obesity or stroke when combined with high-intensity co-interventions.

A trial of nebulised heparin to limit lung injury following cardiac surgery.

Cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass triggers an acute inflammatory response in the lungs. This response gives rise to fibrin deposition in the microvasculature and alveoli of the lungs. Fibrin deposition in the microvasculature increases alveolar dead space, while fibrin deposition in alveoli causes shunting. We investigated whether prophylactic nebulised heparin could limit this form of lung injury. We undertook a single-centre double-blind randomised trial. Forty patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass were randomised to prophylactic nebulised heparin (50,000 U) or placebo. The primary endpoint was the change in arterial oxygen levels over the operative period. Secondary endpoints included end-tidal CO2, the alveolar dead space fraction and bleeding complications. We found nebulised heparin did not improve arterial oxygen levels. Nebulised heparin was, however, associated with a lower alveolar dead space fraction (P <0.05) and lower tidal volumes at the end of surgery (P <0.01). Nebulised heparin was not associated with bleeding complications. In conclusion, prophylactic nebulised heparin did not improve oxygenation, but was associated with evidence of better alveolar perfusion and CO2elimination at the end of surgery.

Are verbal orders a threat to patient safety?

BACKGROUND: The use of verbal orders has been identified as a potential contributor to poor quality and less safe care. As a result, many organisations have encouraged changing the verbal orders process and/or reducing/eliminating verbal orders altogether (Joint Commission (2005), Institute of Medicine (2001), Leapfrog organisation, Institute of Safe Medication Practices). Ironically there is a paucity of research evidence to support the widespread concern over verbal order. AIMS: This paper describes the very limited existing research on verbal orders, presents a model of verbal order use identifying potential error trigger points and suggests a verbal order research agenda in order to better understand the nature and extent of the potential patient care safety threat posed by verbal orders.

Are verbal orders a threat to patient safety?

BACKGROUND: The use of verbal orders has been identified as a potential contributor to poor quality and less safe care. As a result, many organisations have encouraged changing the verbal orders process and/or reducing/eliminating verbal orders altogether (Joint Commission (2005), Institute of Medicine (2001), Leapfrog organisation, Institute of Safe Medication Practices). Ironically there is a paucity of research evidence to support the widespread concern over verbal order. AIMS: This paper describes the very limited existing research on verbal orders, presents a model of verbal order use identifying potential error trigger points and suggests a verbal order research agenda in order to better understand the nature and extent of the potential patient care safety threat posed by verbal orders.

Organizational culture, continuous quality improvement, and medication administration error reporting.

This study explores the relationships among measures of nurses' perceptions of organizational culture, continuous quality improvement (CQI) implementation, and medication administration error (MAE) reporting. Hospital-based nurses were surveyed using measures of organizational culture and CQI implementation. These data were combined with previously collected data on perceptions of MAE reporting. A group-oriented culture had a significant positive correlation with CQI implementation, whereas hierarchical and rational culture types were negatively correlated with CQI implementation. Higher barriers to reporting MAE were associated with lower perceived reporting rates. A group-oriented culture and a greater extent of CQI implementation were positively (but not significantly) associated with the estimated overall percentage of MAEs reported. We conclude that health care organizations have implemented CQI programs, yet barriers remain relative to MAE reporting. There is a need to assess the reliability, validity, and completeness of key quality assessment and risk management data.

Improving medication administration error reporting systems. Why do errors occur?

Monitoring medication administration errors (MAE) is often included as part of the hospital's risk management program. While observation of actual medication administration is the most accurate way to identify errors, hospitals typically rely on voluntary incident reporting processes. Although incident reporting systems are more economical than other methods of error detection, incident reporting can also be a time-consuming process depending on the complexity or "user-friendliness" of the reporting system. Accurate incident reporting systems are also dependent on the ability of the practitioner to: 1) recognize an error has actually occurred; 2) believe the error is significant enough to warrant reporting; and 3) overcome the embarrassment of having committed a MAE and the fear of punishment for reporting a mistake (either one's own or another's mistake).

Understanding and comparing differences in reported medication administration error rates.

The prevention of medication administration errors (MAEs) represents a central focus of hospitals' quality improvement and risk management initiatives. Because the identification and reporting of MAEs is a nonautomated and voluntary process, it is essential to understand the extent to which errors may not be reported. This study reports the results of 2 multihospital surveys in which over 1300 staff nurses in each survey estimated the extent to which various types of nonintravenous (non-i.v.) and intravenous (i.v.)-related MAEs are actually being reported on their nursing units. Overall, respondents estimated that about 60% of MAEs are actually being reported. Considerable differences in estimated rates of MAE reporting were found between staff and supervisors working on the same patient care units. A simulation based on actual and perceived rates of MAE reporting is presented to estimate the range of errors not being reported. Implications regarding the reliability, validity, and completeness of MAEs actually being reported are discussed.

Understanding why medication administration errors may not be reported.

Because the identification and reporting of medication administration errors (MAE) is a nonautomated and voluntary process, it is important to understand potential barriers to MAE reporting. This paper describes and analyzes a survey instrument designed to assist in evaluating the relative importance of 15 different potential MAE-reporting barriers. Based on the responses of over 1300 nurses and a confirmatory LISREL analysis, the 15 potential barriers are combined into 4 subscales: Disagreement Over Error, Reporting Effort, Fear, and Administrative Response. The psychometric properties of this instrument and descriptive profiles are presented. Specific suggestions for enhancing MAE reporting are discussed.

Nurses' perceptions of why medication administration errors occur.

Nurses play a key role in medication administration in hospital settings. Five categories of reasons for medication errors were identified in a survey of 1,384 nurses. These categories include physician, systems, pharmacy, individual, and knowledge-related factors. In this article, issues surrounding the occurrence and prevention of medication errors are discussed.

Perceived barriers in reporting medication administration errors.

BACKGROUND: Assuring that medication administration error (MAE) reports are reliable and valid is of great significance for the patient, the hospital, and the nurse. In most hospitals, MAE reporting relies on the nurse who discovers an error to initiate an error report, whether the error was committed by that nurse or someone else. Because of the potential for negative consequences, there may be significant disincentives for the nurse to report the error. This, the first of two articles, describes the results of a large-scale survey designed to assess nurses' perceptions of the reasons why MAE may not be reported. The companion article compares nurses' estimates of the extent to which MAEs are reported with the actual reported medication error rates. METHODS: Nurses in 24 acute-care hospitals were surveyed to determine perceptions of reasons why medication errors may not be reported. RESULTS: The factor analysis reveals four factors explaining why staff nurses may not report medication errors: fear, disagreement over whether an error occurred, administrative responses to medication errors, and effort required to report MAEs. CONCLUSIONS: There are potential changes in both systems and management responses to MAEs that could improve current practice. These changes need to take into account the influences of organizational, professional, and work group culture.

Understanding patient-centered care in the context of total quality management and continuous quality improvement.

BACKGROUND: Implementing patient-centered care (PCC) requires a fundamental shift in thinking-from how to best provide a wide variety of independent services to how to effectively combine individual service components into an integrated health care experience that meets patient needs and preferences. DISCUSSION: PCC attempts to improve patient care by organizationally and physically moving selected service functions such as basic laboratory, pharmacy, admitting/discharge, medical records, housekeeping, and material support services to patient care areas, thus effecting an organizational restructuring. PCC creates teams composed of multiskilled or cross-trained individuals capable of providing more of the services directly on the patient care unit. Extensive redesign of the basic work processes as proposed by PCC advocates may result in significant changes in employee job scope, task responsibilities, professional autonomy, and reporting relationships. From the employee's perspective such changes may be neither warranted nor welcomed. Therefore, critical PCC implementation issues include obtaining employee buy-in and establishing appropriate incentive structures to facilitate the desired changes. How does PCC fit in with the popular improvement philosophies of total quality management (TQM) and continuous quality improvement (CQI)? Inherent within TQM and CQI is the belief that it is wiser to maximize efforts to design a product or process to be right the first time and to minimize resources devoted to inspection and repair caused by poor processes. PCC builds upon previous TQM/CQI health care efforts by focusing on ways to reduce the white space handoff problem by examining what, if any, changes in underlying structures and processes may be required. In the PCC hospital, TQM/CQI can function as intended, as a methodology for examining and improving the process of care and patient-care outcomes, regardless of internal departmental or profession-based organizational boundaries. CONCLUSION: For hospitals to remain competitive in today's rapidly changing environment, it is becoming necessary to reevaluate both how they are organized and how their work processes have been designed and controlled. The groundwork already laid by TQM/CQI initiatives will facilitate the more fundamental and long-lasting improvements derived from the redesign of the patient-care unit as prescribed by the goals of PCC.

Overcoming the barriers to implementation of TQM/CQI in hospitals: myths and realities.

Many health care organizations are attempting to rapidly implement total quality management (TQM) and continuous quality improvement (CQI) philosophies and concepts. In the case of hospitals, a number of issues resulting from traditional organizational design and management practices as well as the characteristics of health care professionals pose significant challenges to rapid implementation. Recognizing and developing strategies to address these challenges, along with realizing that TQM and CQI represent viable processes for conducting organizational "preventive maintenance," may help in changing the focus of quality assessment and enhancement initiatives from processes that are "broken" to processes that should be "fixed" before they "break." This article discusses strategies for overcoming some of the major barriers and challenges to successful TQM and CQI implementation to the hospital setting.

Structure-activity relationships of some 5-nitro-2-furaldehyde oximes and hydrazones.

5-Nitro-2-furaldoxime, 5-nitro-2-furaldehyde hydrazone, and several derivatives have been prepared, and their stereochemistry studied by NMR. The relationship between the structures of the compounds and their in vitro and in vivo antimicrobial activity was investigated.