scholarly journals Detecting adverse events in surgery: comparing events detected by the Veterans Health Administration Surgical Quality Improvement Program and the Patient Safety Indicators

2014 ◽  
Vol 207 (4) ◽  
pp. 584-595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hillary J. Mull ◽  
Ann M. Borzecki ◽  
Susan Loveland ◽  
Kathleen Hickson ◽  
Qi Chen ◽  
...  
2001 ◽  
Vol 29 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 335-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
William B. Weeks ◽  
Tina Foster ◽  
Amy E. Wallace ◽  
Erik Stalhandske

Tort claims have been studied for various reasons. Several studies have found that most tort claims are not related to negligent adverse events and most negligent adverse events do not result in tort claims. Several studies have examined the disposition of tort claims to understand the likelihood of payment once a claim has been made. Still others have proposed that tort-claims trend analysis may help administrators target their quality-improvement efforts and identify problems with quality that would not otherwise be captured.In this article, we conduct a tort-claims analysis to explore areas for quality improvement, specifically for patient safety, in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Patient safety is an increasingly highlighted aspect of health-care delivery. Failure to assure patient safety can result in bad clinical outcomes, additional costs of care, and a negative organizational image. Filing a tort claim is one way for an individual to express concern about an organization. For our analysis, we draw from resolved tort claims in the Veterans Health Administration from fiscal years 1989 to 2000.


2009 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 182-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick S. Romano ◽  
Hillary J. Mull ◽  
Peter E. Rivard ◽  
Shibei Zhao ◽  
William G. Henderson ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e0146254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Montroy ◽  
Rodney H. Breau ◽  
Sonya Cnossen ◽  
Kelsey Witiuk ◽  
Andrew Binette ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (8) ◽  
pp. 1833-1839 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bharati Kochar ◽  
Edward L Barnes ◽  
Anne F Peery ◽  
Katherine S Cools ◽  
Joseph Galanko ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Ulcerative colitis (UC) patients requiring colectomy often have a staged ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA). There are no prospective data comparing timing of pouch creation. We aimed to compare 30-day adverse event rates for pouch creation at the time of colectomy (PTC) with delayed pouch creation (DPC). Methods Using prospectively collected data from 2011–2015 through the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, we conducted a cohort study including subjects aged ≥18 years with a postoperative diagnosis of UC. We assessed 30-day postoperative rates of unplanned readmissions, reoperations, and major and minor adverse events (AEs), comparing the stage of the surgery where the pouch creation took place. Using a modified Poisson regression model, we estimated risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) adjusting for age, sex, race, body mass index, smoking status, diabetes, albumin, and comorbidities. Results Of 2390 IPAA procedures, 1571 were PTC and 819 were DPC. In the PTC group, 51% were on chronic immunosuppression preoperatively, compared with 15% in the DPC group (P < 0.01). After controlling for confounders, patients who had DPC were significantly less likely to have unplanned reoperations (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24–0.75), major AEs (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52–0.99), and minor AEs (RR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.32–0.73) than PTC. Conclusions Patients undergoing delayed pouch creation were at lower risk for unplanned reoperations and major and minor adverse events compared with patients undergoing pouch creation at the time of colectomy.


2006 ◽  
Vol 72 (11) ◽  
pp. 994-998 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shukri F. Khuri

The Institute of Medicine 1999 publication, To Err is Human, focused attention on preventable provider errors in surgery, and prompted numerous new national initiatives to improve patient safety. It is uncertain whether these initiatives have actually improved patient safety, mainly because of the lack of a quantitative metric for the assessment of patient safety in surgery. A 15-year experience with the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, which originated in the Veteran's Administration in 1991 and was recently made available to the private sector, prompts the surgical community to place patient safety in surgery within a much larger conceptual framework than that of the Institute of Medicine report, and provides a quantitative metric for the assessment of patient safety initiatives. This conceptual framework defines patient safety in surgery as safety from all adverse outcomes (not only preventable errors and sentinel events); regards safety as an integral part of quality of surgical care; recognizes that adverse outcomes, and hence patient safety, are primarily determined by quality of systems of care; and uses comparative risk-adjusted outcome data as a metric for the identification of system problems and for the assessment and improvement of patient safety from adverse outcomes.


2017 ◽  
Vol 96 (2) ◽  
pp. E37-E45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Umang Jain ◽  
Jessica Somerville ◽  
Sujata Saha ◽  
Jon P. Ver Halen ◽  
Anuja K. Antony ◽  
...  

While neck dissection is an important primary and adjunctive procedure in the treatment of head and neck cancer, there is a paucity of studies evaluating outcomes. A retrospective review of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was performed to identify factors associated with adverse events (AEs) in patients undergoing neck dissection. A total of 619 patients were identified, using CPT codes specific to neck dissection. Of the 619 patients undergoing neck dissection, 142 (22.9%) experienced an AE within 30 days of the surgical procedure. Risk factors on multivariate regression analysis associated with increased AEs included dyspnea (odds ratio [OR] 2.57; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06 to 6.22; p = 0.037), previous cardiac surgery (OR 3.38; 95% CI 1.08 to 10.52; p = 0.036), increasing anesthesia time (OR 1.005; 95% CI 1 to 1.009; p = 0.036), and increasing total work relative value units (OR 1.09; CI 1.04 to 1.13; p < 0.001). The current study is the largest, most robust analysis to identify specific risk factors associated with AEs after neck dissection. This information will assist with preoperative optimization, patient counseling, and appropriate risk stratification, and it can serve as benchmarking for institutions comparing surgical outcomes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document