A multicentered academic medical center experience of a simulated root cause analysis (RCA) for hematology/oncology fellows.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 188-188
Author(s):  
Danielle Wallace ◽  
Denise Cochran ◽  
Jennifer Michelle Duff ◽  
Julia Lee Close ◽  
Martina Cathryn Murphy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Near Miss ◽  
Safety Skills ◽  
Clinical Patient ◽  
Root Cause ◽  
Event Flow ◽  
Flow Map

188 Background: Quality improvement and patient safety education is an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) common program requirement for hematology/oncology fellowships. Specifically, the ACGME requires trainee participation in interprofessional clinical patient safety activities, such as root cause analyses. These can be challenging to incorporate into busy schedules and are intimidating to some trainees, but simulated RCAs are a novel way to assure trainees gain important patient safety skills. We report on a multicentered experience utilizing a simulated RCA educational module in an attempt to provide fellows with the tools needed to participate in a live RCA and to increase awareness of the need to analyze patient safety events. Methods: The two-hour module included a didactic session explaining the basics of an RCA including common terminology, effective chart review, and personal interviews. The fellows assessed a patient safety event of a missed coagulopathy and created an event flow map and fishbone analysis. They then formed root cause/contributing factor statements and proposed a solution. Seventeen fellows from two institutions completed pre- and post-session surveys regarding the experience. Results: There was a 47% increase in both the percentage of fellows who felt comfortable participating in live RCAs in the future, and in the number of fellows who felt comfortable with using the tools typically utilized in an RCA. 70.59% of respondents felt that as a result of the mock RCA, they were more likely to report a near miss or adverse event. Conclusions: Mock RCAs are a feasible method of incorporating ACGME-required patient safety activities into hematology/oncology fellow education and are effective in increasing their comfort and understanding of important quality improvement skills

scholarly journals Descriptive Epidemiology of Safety Events at an Academic Medical Center

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 353
Author(s):  
Alexandre R. Marra ◽  
Abdullah Algwizani ◽  
Mohammed Alzunitan ◽  
Theresa M. H. Brennan ◽  
Michael B. Edmond
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Surveillance System ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Incident Reporting ◽  
Near Miss ◽  
Descriptive Epidemiology ◽  
Near Misses ◽  
Academic Medical

Background: Adverse safety events in healthcare are of great concern, and despite an increasing focus on the prevention of error and harm mitigation, the epidemiology of safety events remains incomplete. Methods: We performed an analysis of all reported safety events in an academic medical center using a voluntary incident reporting surveillance system for patient safety. Safety events were classified as: serious (reached the patient and resulted in moderate to severe harm or death); precursor (reached the patient and resulted in minimal or no detectable harm); and near miss (did not reach the patient). Results: During a three-year period, there were 31,817 events reported. Most of the safety events were precursor safety events (reached the patient and resulted in minimal harm or no detectable harm), corresponding to 77.3%. Near misses accounted for 10.8%, and unsafe conditions for 11.8%. The number of reported serious safety events was low, accounting for only 0.1% of all safety events. Conclusions: The reports analysis of these events should lead to a better understanding of risks in patient care and ways to mitigate it.

scholarly journals In-Hospital Patient Safety Events, Healthcare Costs and Utilization: An Analysis from the Incident Reporting System in an Academic Medical Center

Healthcare ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 388
Author(s):  
Yao-Wen Kuo ◽  
Jih-Shuin Jerng ◽  
Chia-Kuei Lin ◽  
Hsiao-Fang Huang ◽  
Li-Chin Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Claims Data ◽  
Reporting System ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Near Miss ◽  
Study Approach ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Matched Comparison ◽  
And Control

The possible association of patient safety events (PSEs) with the costs and utilization remains a concern. In this retrospective analysis, we investigated adult hospitalizations at a medical center between 2010 and 2015 with or without reported PSEs. Administrative and claims data were analyzed to compare the costs and length of stay (LOS) between cases with and without PSEs of the three most common categories during the first 14 days of hospitalization. Two models, including linear regression and propensity score-matched comparison, were performed for each reference day group of hospitalizations. Of 14,181 PSEs from 424,635 hospitalizations, 69.8% were near miss or no-harm events. Costs and LOS were similar between fall cases and controls in all of the 14 reference days. In contrast, for cases of tube and line events and controls, there were consistent differences in costs and LOS in the majority of the reference days (86% and 57%, respectively). Consistent differences were less frequently seen for medication events and control events (36% and 43%, respectively). Our study approach of comparing cases with PSEs and those without any PSE showed significant differences in costs and LOS for tube and line events, and medication events. No difference in cost or LOS was found regarding fall events. Further studies exploring adjustments for event risks and harm-oriented analysis are warranted.

scholarly journals Creation of a dedicated line team for critically ill patients with COVID-19: A multidisciplinary approach to maximize resource utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
pp. 112972982199175
Author(s):  
Pooja Nawathe ◽  
Robert Wong ◽  
Gabriel Pollock ◽  
Jack Green ◽  
Michael Kissen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Resource Utilization ◽  
Vascular Access ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Target Population ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Arterial Line ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Development Organization

Background: Pandemics create challenges for medical centers, which call for innovative adaptations to care for patients during the unusually high census, to distribute stress and work hours among providers, to reduce the likelihood of transmission to health care workers, and to maximize resource utilization. Methods: We describe a multidisciplinary vascular access team’s development to improve frontline providers’ workflow by placing central venous and arterial catheters. Herein we describe the development, organization, and processes resulting in the rapid formation and deployment of this team, reporting on notable clinical issues encountered, which might serve as a basis for future quality improvement and investigation. We describe a retrospective, single-center descriptive study in a large, quaternary academic medical center in a major city. The COVID-19 vascular access team included physicians with specialized experience in placing invasive catheters and whose usual clinical schedule had been lessened through deferment of elective cases. The target population included patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 in the medical ICU (MICU) needing invasive catheter placement. The line team placed all invasive catheters on patients in the MICU with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. Results and conclusions: Primary data collected were the number and type of catheters placed, time of team member exposure to potentially infected patients, and any complications over the first three weeks. Secondary outcomes pertained to workflow enhancement and quality improvement. 145 invasive catheters were placed on 67 patients. Of these 67 patients, 90% received arterial catheters, 64% central venous catheters, and 25% hemodialysis catheters. None of the central venous catheterizations or hemodialysis catheters were associated with early complications. Arterial line malfunction due to thrombosis was the most frequent complication. Division of labor through specialized expert procedural teams is feasible during a pandemic and offloads frontline providers while potentially conferring safety benefits.

scholarly journals An innovative resident-driven mortality case review curriculum to teach and drive system-based practice improvements in the United States

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 31
Author(s):  
Nila S. Radhakrishnan ◽  
Margaret C. Lo ◽  
Rohit Bishnoi ◽  
Subhankar Samal ◽  
Robert Leverence ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Systems Of Care ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
The United States ◽  
Case Review ◽  
Failure To Rescue ◽  
Internal Medicine Residents ◽  
Mortality Case

Purpose: Traditionally, the morbidity and mortality conference (M&MC) is a forum where possible medical errors are discussed. Although M&MCs can facilitate identification of opportunities for systemwide improvements, few studies have described their use for this purpose, particularly in residency training programs. This paper describes the use of M&MC case review as a quality improvement activity that teaches system-based practice and can engage residents in improving systems of care. Methods: Internal medicine residents at a tertiary care academic medical center reviewed 347 consecutive mortalities from March 2014 to September 2017. The residents used case review worksheets to categorize and track causes of mortality, and then debriefed with a faculty member. Selected cases were then presented at a larger interdepartmental meeting and action items were implemented. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to analyze the results. Results: The residents identified a possible diagnostic mismatch at some point from admission to death in 54.5% of cases (n= 189) and a possible need for improved management in 48.0% of cases. Three possible management failure themes were identified, including failure to plan, failure to communicate, and failure to rescue, which accounted for 21.9%, 10.7 %, and 10.1% of cases, respectively. Following these reviews, quality improvement initiatives proposed by residents led to system-based changes. Conclusion: A resident-driven mortality review curriculum can lead to improvements in systems of care. This novel type of curriculum can be used to teach system-based practice. The recruitment of teaching faculty with expertise in quality improvement and mortality case analyses is essential for such a project.

Patient Safety Trilogy: Perspectives from Clinical Engineering

2013 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Izabella Gieras ◽  
Paul Sherman ◽  
Dennis Minsent
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Clinical Engineering ◽  
Veterans Health ◽  
Health Administration ◽  
Healthcare Technology ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Clinical Engineers

This article examines the role a clinical engineering or healthcare technology management (HTM) department can play in promoting patient safety from three different perspectives: a community hospital, a national government health system, and an academic medical center. After a general overview, Izabella Gieras from Huntington Hospital in Pasadena, CA, leads off by examining the growing role of human factors in healthcare technology, and describing how her facility uses clinical simulations in medical equipment evaluations. A section by Paul Sherman follows, examining patient safety initiatives from the perspective of the Veterans Health Administration with a focus on hazard alerts and recalls. Dennis Minsent from Oregon Health & Science University writes about patient safety from an academic healthcare perspective, and details how clinical engineers can engage in multidisciplinary safety opportunities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document