Andrew A. White

Current trends in interprofessional education of health sciences students: A literature review

There is a pressing need to redesign health professions education and integrate an interprofessional and systems approach into training. At the core of interprofessional education (IPE) are creating training synergies across healthcare professions and equipping learners with the collaborative skills required for todays complex healthcare environment. Educators are increasingly experimenting with new IPE models, but best practices for translating IPE into interprofessional practice and team-based care are not well defined. Our study explores current IPE models to identify emerging trends in strategies reported in published studies. We report key characteristics of 83 studies that report IPE activities between 2005 and 2010, including those utilizing qualitative, quantitative and mixed method research approaches. We found a wide array of IPE models and educational components. Although most studies reported outcomes in student learning about professional roles, team communication and general satisfaction with IPE activities, our review identified inconsistencies and shortcomings in how IPE activities are conceptualized, implemented, assessed and reported. Clearer specifications of minimal reporting requirements are useful for developing and testing IPE models that can inform and facilitate successful translation of IPE best practices into academic and clinical practice arenas.

Cause and effect analysis of closed claims in obstetrics and gynecology.

BACKGROUND: Identifying the etiologies of real or perceived adverse clinical events and undesired outcomes is an important step in improving patient safety and reducing malpractice risks. Systematic analysis of obstetrics and gynecology-related risk management files allows a more complete examination of ways that human and systems factors may contribute to adverse events. OBJECTIVE: To learn the medical complaints of patients who experienced apparent adverse events, the general causes of those adverse events, and the significant specific causal factors involved in obstetrics and gynecology-related risk management cases. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 90 consecutive obstetrics and gynecology-related internal review files opened by a medical centers risk managers between 1995 and 2001. Each file was analyzed to identify factors that may have contributed to or caused unanticipated adverse events. The main outcome was the pattern of contributing factors when they were aggregated into categories. RESULTS: Fifty percent of cases were associated with inpatient obstetrics. Factors that may have contributed to adverse events were identified in 78% of cases, and most had more than one contributing factor. Thirty-one percent of adverse events were associated with apparent communication problems. Clinical performance issues were identified in 31% of cases, diagnostic issues in 18% of cases, and patient behavior contributed to 14% of adverse events. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic, therapeutic, and communication issues were the most common factors identified. Although the generalizability of these data are unknown, all obstetrics and gynecology departments face multiple challenges in assuring consistent quality care. Analysis of claims files may help identify opportunities for improvement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II-3

The Attitudes and Experiences of Trainees Regarding Disclosing Medical Errors to Patients

Purpose To measure trainees’ attitudes and experiences regarding medical error and error disclosure. Method In 2003, the authors carried out a cross-sectional survey of 629 medical students (320 in their second year, 309 in their fourth year), 226 interns (159 in medicine, 67 in surgery), and 283 residents (211 in medicine, 72 in surgery), a total 1,138 trainees at two U.S. academic health centers. Results The response rate was 78% (889/1,138). Most trainees (74%; 652/881) agreed that medical error is among the most serious health care problems. Nearly all (99%; 875/884) agreed serious errors should be disclosed to patients, but 87% (774/889) acknowledged at least one possible barrier, including thinking that the patient would not understand the disclosure (59%; 525/889), the patient would not want to know about the error (42%; 376/889), and the patient might sue (33%; 297/889). Personal involvement with medical errors was common among the fourth-year students (78%; 164/209) and the residents (98%; 182/185). Among residents, 45% (83/185) reported involvement in a serious error, 34% (62/183) reported experience disclosing a serious error, and 63% (115/183) had disclosed a minor error. Whereas only 33% (289/880) of trainees had received training in error disclosure, 92% (808/881) expressed interest in such training, particularly at the time of disclosure. Conclusions Although many trainees had disclosed errors to patients, only a minority had been formally prepared to do so. Formal disclosure curricula, coupled with supervised practice, are necessary to prepare trainees to independently disclose errors to patients by the end of their training.

Surgical adverse events, risk management, and malpractice outcome: Morbidity and mortality review is not enough

ObjectiveTo review all admissions (age > 13) to three surgical patient care centers at a single academic medical center between January 1, 1995, and December 6, 1999, for significant surgical adverse events. Summary Background DataLittle data exist on the interrelationships between surgical adverse events, risk management, malpractice claims, and resulting indemnity payments to plaintiffs. The authors hypothesized that examination of this process would identify performance improvement opportunities overlooked by standard medical peer review; the risk of litigation would be constant across the three homogeneous patient care centers; and the risk management process would exceed the performance improvement process. MethodsData collected included patient demographics (age, gender, and employment status), hospital financials (hospital charges, costs, and financial class), and outcome. Outcome categories were medical (disability: <1 month, 1–6 months, permanent/death), legal (no legal action, settlement, summary judgment), financial (indemnity payments, legal fees, write-offs), and cause and effect analysis. Cause and effect analysis attempts to identify system failures contributing to adverse outcomes. This was determined by two independent analysts using the 17 Harvard criteria and subdividing these into subsystem causative factors. ResultsThe study group consisted of 130 patients with surgical adverse events resulting in total liabilities of

How trainees would disclose medical errors: educational implications for training programmes.

8.2 million. The incidence of adverse events per 1,000 admissions across the three patient care centers was similar, but indemnity payments per 1,000 admissions varied (cardiothoracic =

Transparency When Things Go Wrong: Physician Attitudes About Reporting Medical Errors to Patients, Peers, and Institutions.

30, women’s health =

Risk managers' descriptions of programs to support second victims after adverse events

90, trauma =

Medical error and disclosure

520). Patient demographics were not predictive of high-risk subgroups for adverse events or litigation. In terms of medical outcome, 51 patients had permanent disability or death, accounting for 98% of the indemnity payments. In terms of legal outcome, 103 patients received no indemnity payments, 15 patients received indemnity payments, four suits remain open, and in eight cases charges were written off (

Interhospital transfer patients discharged by academic hospitalists and general internists

0.121 million). To date, no cases have been adjudicated in court. Cause and effect analysis identified 390 system failures contributing to the adverse events (mean 3.0 failures per adverse event); there were 4.7 failures per adverse event in the 15 indemnity cases. Five categories of causes accounted for 75% of the failures (patient management, n = 104; communication, n = 89; administration, n = 33; documentation, n = 32; behavior, n = 23). The current medical review process would have identified 104 of 390 systems failures (37%). ConclusionsThis study demonstrates no rational link between the tort system and the reduction of adverse events. Sixty-three percent of contributing causes to adverse events were undetected by current medical review processes. Adverse events occur at the interface between different systems or disciplines and result from multiple failures. Indemnity costs per hospital day vary dramatically by patient care center (range

Use of a computer-based provider order entry (CPOE) intervention to optimize laboratory testing in patients with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

3.60–97.60 a day). The regionalization of healthcare is in jeopardy from the burden of high indemnity payments.