scholarly journals Challenges with Measurement and Transcription of Patient Height: An Analysis of Patient Safety Events in Pennsylvania Related to Inaccurate Patient Height

2021 ◽  
pp. 48-57
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Kukielka

An accurate patient height is necessary to calculate certain measurements (e.g., body surface area [BSA]) and lab values (e.g., creatinine clearance [CrCl]), which may be needed to assess renal, cardiac, and lung function and to calculate accurate medication doses. We queried the Pennsylvania Patient Safety Reporting System (PA-PSRS) and identified 679 event reports related to an inaccurate patient height. All events were classified by the reporting facility as incidents, meaning that the patient did not sustain an unanticipated injury or require the delivery of additional healthcare services. The most common care area group where an event occurred was outpatient/clinic (35.8%; 243 of 679). Events were categorized as being related to an error in transcription (72.5%; 492 of 679) or measurement (7.4%; 50 of 679), and the remainder were categorized as etiology of error unclear (20.2%; 137 of 679). The most common transcription errors were the use of the wrong unit of measurement, the transposition of another measurement with height, and typographical errors. Inaccurate patient heights most often led to errors in calculation of medication doses or laboratory values. The most common medication class involved in a dosing error was cancer chemotherapy. In order to ensure accuracy of patient height measurements, patients should be measured at the beginning of every healthcare encounter, units of measurement should be consistent from measurement to transcription into the electronic medical record, and estimated patient height should never be relied upon or recorded.

2019 ◽  
pp. 42-50
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Kukielka ◽  
Kelly Gipson ◽  
Rebecca Jones

Successful telemetry monitoring relies on timely clinician response to potentially life-threatening cardiac rhythm abnormalities. Breakdowns in the processes and procedures associated with telemetry monitoring, as well as improperly functioning telemetry monitoring equipment, may lead to events that compromise patient safety. An analysis of reports submitted to the Pennsylvania Patient Safety Reporting System (PA-PSRS) from January 2014 through December 2018 identified 558 events specifically involving interruptions or failures associated with telemetry monitoring equipment or with the healthcare providers responsible for setting up and maintaining proper functioning of that equipment. The analysis highlighted a steady increase in the quantity of event reports associated with telemetry monitoring submitted to PA-PSRS. User errors accounted for nearly half (47.1%, 263 of 558) of events in the analysis. The most common event subtypes included: errors involving batteries in telemetry monitoring equipment (14.0%); errors in which patients were not connected to telemetry monitoring equipment as ordered (12.9%); errors involving broken, damaged, or malfunctioning telemetry monitoring equipment (10.9%); and errors in which patients were connected to the wrong telemetry monitoring equipment (9.0%).


2020 ◽  
pp. 16-27
Author(s):  
Matthew Taylor ◽  
Shawn Kepner ◽  
Lea Anne Gardner ◽  
Rebecca Jones

COVID-19 (i.e., coronavirus disease 2019) was declared a pandemic and has had a profound impact on healthcare systems, which may increase the risk of patient harm. We conducted a query of the Pennsylvania Patient Safety Reporting System (PA-PSRS) database to identify COVID-19–related events submitted by acute care hospitals between January 1 and April 15, 2020. We identified 343 relevant event reports from 71 hospitals and conducted a descriptive study to identify the prevalence of and relationships between 13 categories of associated factors and 6 categories of event outcomes. We found that 36% (124 of 343) of events had more than one associated factor and 24% (83 of 343) had more than one outcome. The most frequently identified factors were Laboratory Testing (47%; 161 of 343), Process/Protocol (25%; 87 of 343), and Isolation Integrity (22%; 74 of 343). The two most frequent outcomes were Exposure to COVID-19 Positive or Suspected Positive Patient (50%; 173 of 343) and Missed/Delayed Test or Result (31%; 108 of 343). Finally, the findings showed that seven of the associated factors had a notable impact on the frequency of Exposure to COVID-19 Positive or Suspected Positive Patient outcome. Overall, we anticipate that the results can be used to identify areas of greatest need and risk, which could help to guide allocation of resources to mitigate risk of patient harm.


2021 ◽  
pp. 16-27
Author(s):  
Matthew Taylor ◽  
William Pileggi

Anesthetics and adjunct agents have a long history of being associated with patients engaging in delirious or agitated behavior in a perioperative setting. Prior to this study, few have explored the topic with a focus on safety for both the patient and staff. We explored the Pennsylvania Patient Safety Reporting System (PA-PSRS) database for event reports to identify bouts of delirium/ agitation associated with anesthetics and/or adjunct agents that occurred during the pre-, intra-, or postoperative period. We identified 97 event reports from 63 healthcare facilities over a two-year period. Patients’ ages ranged from 1 to 91 years and 66% of the patients were reported as male. Also, 8% of the delirium/agitation occurred preoperatively, 8% intraoperatively, and 84% postoperatively. Across all three operative periods, 62% of the reports described dangerous/nonviolent behavior and 26% described dangerous/violent behavior. Additionally, 40% of the event reports described one or more patient injuries (e.g., cardiopulmonary arrest, asphyxiation, hematoma, prolapse/dehiscence, progressive ischemia) and 36% of the patients required additional healthcare services or monitoring (e.g., intra- or interfacility transfer, additional surgical procedure). Finally, 54% of the event reports described patient behavior that created an immediate and high risk of staff harm. Overall, the current study provides novel insight into how delirium/agitation has varying safety implications depending on the operative period. We encourage readers to review Table 5, which proposes a four-phase intervention package to prevent, treat, and de-escalate bouts of delirium/agitation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (suppl 1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Poliana Rolim Saraiva dos Santos ◽  
Ana Fátima Carvalho Fernandes ◽  
Denise Montenegro da Silva ◽  
Régia Christina Moura Barbosa Castro

ABSTRACT Objective: to report the experience of a health team in restructuring service at a mastology outpatient clinic. Methods: an experience report in a public university service mastology outpatient in Ceará between March and April 2020. Service in this outpatient clinic is exclusively for women and who have breast changes for surgical treatments ranging from nodulectomies to mastectomies with oncoplastic. Results: increased COVID-19 cases brought the need to restructure healthcare services. The following steps were followed: identification of scheduled patients, reading of clinical developments in electronic medical records, individual assessment to define whether or not appointment would remain, telephone contact to inform about unscheduling. Among the 555 consultations scheduled for March and April 2020, 316 (56.9%) were maintained. Final considerations: restructuring consultations at a mastology outpatient clinic optimized the waiting time for consultations and avoided crowds at service, providing patient safety.


2015 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-AP1 ◽  
Author(s):  
James G. Mansfield ◽  
Robert A. Caplan ◽  
John S. Campos ◽  
David F. Dreis ◽  
Cathie Furman

2012 ◽  
Vol 81 (12) ◽  
pp. 834-841 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chung-Chih Lin ◽  
Chung-Liang Shih ◽  
Hsun-Hsiang Liao ◽  
Cathy H.Y. Wung

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document