Elisabeth Burdick

Acute Kidney Injury, Mortality, Length of Stay, and Costs in Hospitalized Patients

The marginal effects of acute kidney injury on in-hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS), and costs have not been well described. A consecutive sample of 19,982 adults who were admitted to an urban academic medical center, including 9210 who had two or more serum creatinine (SCr) determinations, was evaluated. The presence and degree of acute kidney injury were assessed using absolute and relative increases from baseline to peak SCr concentration during hospitalization. Large increases in SCr concentration were relatively rare (e.g., >or=2.0 mg/dl in 105 [1%] patients), whereas more modest increases in SCr were common (e.g., >or=0.5 mg/dl in 1237 [13%] patients). Modest changes in SCr were significantly associated with mortality, LOS, and costs, even after adjustment for age, gender, admission International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis, severity of illness (diagnosis-related group weight), and chronic kidney disease. For example, an increase in SCr >or=0.5 mg/dl was associated with a 6.5-fold (95% confidence interval 5.0 to 8.5) increase in the odds of death, a 3.5-d increase in LOS, and nearly 7500 dollars in excess hospital costs. Acute kidney injury is associated with significantly increased mortality, LOS, and costs across a broad spectrum of conditions. Moreover, outcomes are related directly to the severity of acute kidney injury, whether characterized by nominal or percentage changes in serum creatinine.

Preventable adverse drug events in hospitalized patients: a comparative study of intensive care and general care units.

OBJECTIVES To compare the frequency and preventability of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events in intensive care units (ICUs) and non-ICUs. To evaluate systems factors involving the individual caregivers, care unit teams, and patients involved in each adverse drug event by comparing ICUs with non-ICUs and medical ICUs with surgical ICUs. DESIGN Prospective cohort study. Participants included all 4,031 adult admissions to a stratified, random sample of 11 medical and surgical units in two tertiary care hospitals over a 6-month period. Units included two medical and three surgical ICUs and four medical and two surgical general care units. SETTING Two tertiary care hospitals: Eleven medical and surgical units, including two medical and three surgical ICUs. PATIENTS Adult admissions (n = 4,031). INTERVENTIONS None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Rate of preventable adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events, length of stay, charges, costs, and measures of the units environment. Incidents were detected by stimulated self-report by nurses and pharmacists and by daily review of all charts by nurse investigators. Incidents were subsequently classified by two independent reviewers as to whether they represented adverse drug events or potential adverse drug events and as to severity and preventability. Those individuals involved in the preventable adverse drug event and potential adverse drug event underwent detailed interviews by peer case-investigators. The rate of preventable adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events in ICUs was 19 events per 1000 patient days, nearly twice that rate of non-ICUs (p <.01). The medical ICU rate (25 events per 1000 patient days) was significantly (p <.05) higher than the surgical ICU rate (14 events per 1000 patient days). When adjusted for the number of drugs used in the previous 24 hrs or ordered since admission, there were no differences in rates between ICUs and non-ICUs. ICU acuity, length of stay, and severity of the adverse drug event were greater in ICUs than non-ICUs, but there were no differences between medical ICU and surgical ICU patients. Structured interviews indicated almost no differences between ICUs and non-ICUs for many characteristics of the patient, patient care team, systems, and individual caregivers. CONCLUSIONS The rate of preventable and potential adverse drug events was twice as high in ICUs compared with non-ICUs. However, when adjusted for the number of drugs ordered, there was no greater likelihood for preventable adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events to occur in ICUs than in non-ICUs. Preventable adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events occurred in units that functioned normally and involved caregivers who were working under reasonably normal circumstances, not at the extremes of workload, stress, or a difficult environment.

An empirical study of the possible relation of treatment differences to quality scores in controlled randomized clinical trials.

Meta-analytic investigations sometimes use assessments of research quality according to a formal protocol as a tool for improving research synthesis. We asked whether a particular quality scoring system could have a direct use in adjusting the summary estimates of a treatment difference. In an empirical study of the relation of quality scores to treatment differences in published meta-analyses of 7 groups of controlled randomized clinical trials comprising 107 primary studies, we found no relation between treatment difference and overall quality score. We also found no relation between quality score and variation in treatment difference. The level of quality scores has increased at a rate of 9% per decade for three decades, averaging 0.51 on a scale of 0 to 1 for the 1980s, and leaving much room for improvement. Nevertheless, attention to quality of studies by editors, reviewers, and authors may be raising both the level of research done and quality of the reports.

Outpatient Prescribing Errors and the Impact of Computerized Prescribing

AbstractBACKGROUND: Medication errors are common among inpatients and many are preventable with computerized prescribing. Relatively little is known about outpatient prescribing errors or the impact of computerized prescribing in this setting. OBJECTIVE: To assess the rates, types, and severity of outpatient prescribing errors and understand the potential impact of computerized prescribing. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study in 4 adult primary care practices in Boston using prescription review, patient survey, and chart review to identify medication errors, potential adverse drug events (ADEs) and preventable ADEs. PARTICIPANTS: Outpatients over age 18 who received a prescription from 24 participating physicians. RESULTS: We screened 1879 prescriptions from 1202 patients, and completed 661 surveys (response rate 55%). Of the prescriptions, 143 (7.6%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.4% to 8.8%) contained a prescribing error. Three errors led to preventable ADEs and 62 (43%; 3% of all prescriptions) had potential for patient injury (potential ADEs); I was potentially life-threatening (2%) and 15 were serious (24%). Errors in frequency (n=77, 54%) and dose (n=26, 18%) were common. The rates of medication errors and potential ADEs were not significantly different at basic computerized prescribing sites (4.3% vs 11.0%, P=.31; 2.6% vs 4.0%, P=.16) compared to handwritten sites. Advanced checks (including dose and frequency checking) could have prevented 95% of potential ADEs. CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing errors occurred in 7.6% of outpatient prescriptions and many could have harmed patients. Basic computerized prescribing systems may not be adequate to reduce errors. More advanced systems with dose and frequency checking are likely needed to prevent potentially harmful errors.

Medication safety in the ambulatory chemotherapy setting

Little is known concerning the safety of the outpatient chemotherapy process. In the current study, the authors sought to identify medication error and potential adverse drug event (ADE) rates in the outpatient chemotherapy setting.

Recovery from Medical Errors: The Critical Care Nursing Safety Net

BACKGROUND Safety initiatives have primarily focused on physicians despite the fact that nurses provide the majority of direct inpatient care. Patient surveillance and preventing errors from harming patients represent essential nursing responsibilities but have received relatively little study. METHODS The study was conducted between July 2003 and July 2004 in a 10-bed academic coronary care unit. Direct observation of nursing care and solicited and institutional incident reports were used to find potential incidents. Two physician reviewers rated incidents as to the presence, preventability, and potential severity of harm of errors and associated factors. RESULTS Overall data were collected for 147 days, including 150 hours of direct observation. One hundred forty-two recovered medical errors were found, including 61% (86/142) during direct observations. Most errors (69%; 98/142) were intercepted before reaching the patients. Errors that reached patients included 13% that were mitigated before resulting in harm and 18% that were ameliorated before more severe harm could occur. DISCUSSION Protecting patients from the potentially dangerous consequences of medical errors is one of the many ways critical care nurses improve patient safety. Interventions designed to increase the ability of nurses to recover and promptly report errors have the potential to improve patient outcomes.

Physicians' Use of Key Functions in Electronic Health Records from 2005 to 2007: A Statewide Survey

OBJECTIVE Electronic health records (EHRs) have potential to improve quality and safety, but many physicians do not use these systems to full capacity. The objective of this study was to determine whether this usage gap is narrowing over time. DESIGN Follow-up mail survey of 1,144 physicians in Massachusetts who completed a 2005 survey. MEASUREMENTS Adoption of EHRs and availability and use of 10 EHR functions. RESULTS The response rate was 79.4%. In 2007, 35% of practices had EHRs, up from 23% in 2005. Among practices with EHRs, there was little change between 2005 and 2007 in the availability of nine of ten EHR features; the notable exception was electronic prescribing, reported as available in 44.7% of practices with EHRs in 2005 and 70.8% in 2007. Use of EHR functions changed inconsequentially, with more than one out of five physicians not using each available function regularly in both 2005 and 2007. Only electronic prescribing increased substantially: in 2005, 19.9% of physicians with this function available used it most or all the time, compared with 42.6% in 2007 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS By 2007, more than one third of practices in Massachusetts reported having EHRs; the availability and use of electronic prescribing within these systems has increased. In contrast, physicians reported little change in the availability and use of other EHR functions. System refinements, certification efforts, and health policies, including standards development, should address the gaps in both EHR adoption and the use of key functions.

Impact of Robotic Antineoplastic Preparation on Safety, Workflow, and Costs

PURPOSE Antineoplastic preparation presents unique safety concerns and consumes significant pharmacy staff time and costs. Robotic antineoplastic and adjuvant medication compounding may provide incremental safety and efficiency advantages compared with standard pharmacy practices. METHODS We conducted a direct observation trial in an academic medical center pharmacy to compare the effects of usual/manual antineoplastic and adjuvant drug preparation (baseline period) with robotic preparation (intervention period). The primary outcomes were serious medication errors and staff safety events with the potential for harm of patients and staff, respectively. Secondary outcomes included medication accuracy determined by gravimetric techniques, medication preparation time, and the costs of both ancillary materials used during drug preparation and personnel time. RESULTS Among 1,421 and 972 observed medication preparations, we found nine (0.7%) and seven (0.7%) serious medication errors (P = .8) and 73 (5.1%) and 28 (2.9%) staff safety events (P = .007) in the baseline and intervention periods, respectively. Drugs failed accuracy measurements in 12.5% (23 of 184) and 0.9% (one of 110) of preparations in the baseline and intervention periods, respectively (P < .001). Mean drug preparation time increased by 47% when using the robot (P = .009). Labor costs were similar in both study periods, although the ancillary material costs decreased by 56% in the intervention period (P < .001). CONCLUSION Although robotically prepared antineoplastic and adjuvant medications did not reduce serious medication errors, both staff safety and accuracy of medication preparation were improved significantly. Future studies are necessary to address the overall cost effectiveness of these robotic implementations.

Outcomes of care and resource utilization among patients with knee or shoulder disorders treated by general internists, rheumatologists, or orthopedic surgeons

PURPOSE Previous studies have suggested that specialists may achieve better clinical outcomes for patients, albeit often at greater cost. We sought to compare outcomes of care and resource utilization among patients with shoulder or knee problems who were treated by general internists, rheumatologists, and orthopedic surgeons. SUBJECTS AND METHODS Outpatients with knee or shoulder complaints who were seen by general internists, rheumatologists, or orthopedic surgeons at an academic medical center were administered questionnaires at enrollment in the study and again 3 months later. The questionnaires included validated measures of satisfaction, functional status, and pain severity, as well as resource utilization. We compared baseline clinical characteristics, satisfaction with care, resource utilization, and changes in function and symptoms during 3 months of follow-up among patients who were cared for by the three different types of providers. RESULTS A total of 534 patients responded to the baseline survey and 436 (82%) to the 3-month follow-up survey. About 60% (n = 323) had knee pain. Orthopedists cared for 40% (n = 211) of the patients, with the remainder treated in approximately equal numbers by general internists or rheumatologists. At baseline, patients of internists had less severe pain (differences of 0.3 to 0.6 points on a 1 to 5 scale, P <0.05) and functional limitations (differences of 0.4 to 0.6 points on a 1 to 5 scale, P <0.0006) than patients of rheumatologists and orthopedic surgeons. Adjusting for baseline differences, there were no significant differences among provider groups in pain relief or functional improvement during follow-up. However, in adjusted analyses, patients with shoulder pain who were cared for by orthopedic surgeons were least satisfied with the office environment [adjusted mean (+/- SD) satisfaction score of 1.6 +/- 0.8 on a 1 to 4 scale for orthopedic surgeons vs 1.3 +/- 0.8 for rheumatologists and 1.4 +/- 0.8 for internists, P = 0.004]. Among patients with knee pain, those treated by rheumatologists and orthopedic surgeons were more satisfied with the doctor-patient interaction (adjusted mean satisfaction scores of 1.1 +/- 0.9 for rheumatologists and 1.2 +/- 0.7 for orthopedic surgeons on a 1 to 4 scale vs 1.4 +/- 0.8 for general internists, P = 0.003). Orthopedic surgeons obtained significantly more radiographs of the knee or shoulder and more magnetic resonance imaging scans of the knee. Rheumatologists performed significantly more aspirations or injection procedures. Among all patients, those treated by rheumatologists were most satisfied with the physician interaction, and those treated by orthopedic surgeons were most satisfied with treatment results. CONCLUSION The relative benefits of specialist compared with generalist care for patients with knee or shoulder pain depend on the importance attached to resource utilization, patient satisfaction, and health outcomes.

Guided medication dosing for elderly emergency patients using real-time, computerized decision support

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the impact of a real-time computerized decision support tool in the emergency department that guides medication dosing for the elderly on physician ordering behavior and on adverse drug events (ADEs). DESIGN A prospective controlled trial was conducted over 26 weeks. The status of the decision support tool alternated OFF (7/17/06-8/29/06), ON (8/29/06-10/10/06), OFF (10/10/06-11/28/06), and ON (11/28/06-1/16/07) in consecutive blocks during the study period. In patients ≥65 who were ordered certain benzodiazepines, opiates, non-steroidals, or sedative-hypnotics, the computer application either adjusted the dosing or suggested a different medication. Physicians could accept or reject recommendations. MEASUREMENTS The primary outcome compared medication ordering consistent with recommendations during ON versus OFF periods. Secondary outcomes included the admission rate, emergency department length of stay for discharged patients, 10-fold dosing orders, use of a second drug to reverse the original medication, and rate of ADEs using previously validated explicit chart review. RESULTS 2398 orders were placed for 1407 patients over 1548 visits. The majority (49/53; 92.5%) of recommendations for alternate medications were declined. More orders were consistent with dosing recommendations during ON (403/1283; 31.4%) than OFF (256/1115; 23%) periods (p≤0.0001). 673 (43%) visits were reviewed for ADEs. The rate of ADEs was lower during ON (8/237; 3.4%) compared with OFF (31/436; 7.1%) periods (p=0.02). The remaining secondary outcomes showed no difference. LIMITATIONS Single institution study, retrospective chart review for ADEs. CONCLUSION Though overall agreement with recommendations was low, real-time computerized decision support resulted in greater acceptance of medication recommendations. Fewer ADEs were observed when computerized decision support was active.