Dissemination of patient navigation programs across the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To use diffusion and dissemination frameworks to describe how indicators of economic and health care disparity affect the location and type of patient navigation programs. METHODS: A cross-sectional national Web-based survey conducted during 2009-2010 with support from 65 separate national and regional stakeholder organizations. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1116 self-identified patient navigators across the United States. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The location and characteristics of patient navigation programs according to economic and health care disparity indicators. RESULTS: Patient navigation programs appear to be geographically dispersed across the United States. Program differences were observed in navigator type, population served, and setting by poverty level. Programs in high-poverty versus low-poverty areas were more likely to use lay navigators (P < .001) and to be located in community health centers and agencies with religious affiliations (50.6 vs 36.4%, and 21.5% vs 16.7%. respectively; P ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSION(S): Results suggest that navigation programs have spread beyond initial target inception areas and also serve as a potentially important resource in communities with higher levels of poverty and/or relatively low access to care. In addition, while nurse navigators have emerged as a significant component of the patient navigation workforce, lay health navigators serve a vital role in underserved communities. Other factors from dissemination frameworks may influence the spread of navigation and provide useful insights to support the dissemination of programs to areas of high need.

Drug Shortage Impacts Patient Receipt of Induction Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Examine the impact of the 2011 shortage of the drug cytarabine on patient receipt and timeliness of induction treatment for Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML). STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort was utilized to examine odds of receipt of inpatient induction chemotherapy and time to first dose across major (N = 105) and moderate (N = 316) shortage time periods as compared to a nonshortage baseline (N = 1,147). DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: De-identified patient data from 2008 to 2011 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) were linked to 2007-2013 Medicare claims and 2007-2013 Hospital Characteristics. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Compared to prior nonshortage time period, patients diagnosed during a major drug shortage were 47 percent less likely (p < .05) to receive inpatient chemotherapy within 14 days of diagnosis. Patients who were younger, had a lower Charlson Comorbidity score, and for whom AML was a first primary cancer were prioritized across all periods. CONCLUSIONS: Period of major shortage of a generic oncolytic, without an equivalent therapeutic substitute, reduced timely receipt of induction chemotherapy treatment. More favorable economic and regulatory policies for generic drug suppliers might result in greater availability of essential, older generic drug products that face prolonged or chronic shortage.

Systematic evidence review of rates and burden of harm of intravenous admixture drug preparation errors in healthcare settings.

OBJECTIVE: To examine published evidence on intravenous admixture preparation errors (IAPEs) in healthcare settings. METHODS: Searches were conducted in three electronic databases (January 2005 to April 2017). Publications reporting rates of IAPEs and error types were reviewed and categorised into the following groups: component errors, dose/calculation errors, aseptic technique errors and composite errors. The methodological rigour of each study was assessed using the Hawker method. RESULTS: Of the 34 articles that met inclusion criteria, 28 reported the site of IAPEs: central pharmacies (n=8), nursing wards (n=14), both settings (n=4) and other sites (n=3). Using the Hawker criteria, 14% of the articles were of good quality, 74% were of fair quality and 12% were of poor quality. Error types and reported rates varied substantially, including wrong drug (~0% to 4.7%), wrong diluent solution (0% to 49.0%), wrong label (0% to 99.0%), wrong dose (0% to 32.6%), wrong concentration (0.3% to 88.6%), wrong diluent volume (0.06% to 49.0%) and inadequate aseptic technique (0% to 92.7%)%). Four studies directly compared incidence by preparation site and/or method, finding error incidence to be lower for doses prepared within a central pharmacy versus the nursing ward and lower for automated preparation versus manual preparation. Although eight studies (24%) reported ≥1 errors with the potential to cause patient harm, no study directly linked IAPE occurrences to specific adverse patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The available data suggest a need to continue to optimise the intravenous preparation process, focus on improving preparation workflow, design and implement preventive strategies, train staff on optimal admixture protocols and implement standardisation. Future research should focus on the development of consistent error subtype definitions, standardised reporting methodology and reliable, reproducible methods to track and link risk factors with the burden of harm associated with these errors.

Primary Intravenous Set Consumption Across 3 Branded Infusion Pumps.

This retrospective study of 6426 hip replacement, coronary artery bypass graft, and colectomy surgeries across 23 US hospitals found that intravenous (IV) set designs that can be interchanged for use both in gravity-fed and automated pump delivery systems are replaced less frequently than IV sets designed for use primarily by one delivery method. Semistructured interviews with nurses highlighted the impact of set design on nursing workflow when moving between gravity-fed and pump-based administration. Use of interchangeable, single-design IV sets across gravity and automated infusions minimizes disruptions to closed systems, may reduce nurses being distracted from patients' clinical needs when replacing sets, and may yield supply cost savings.