Laura L. Morlock

Improving patient safety in intensive care units in Michigan.

PURPOSE The aim of this study was to describe the design and lessons learned from implementing a large-scale patient safety collaborative and the impact of an intervention on teamwork climate in intensive care units (ICUs) across the state of Michigan. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study used a collaborative model for improvement involving researchers from the Johns Hopkins University and Michigan Health and Hospital Association. A quality improvement team in each ICU collected and submitted baseline data and implemented quality improvement interventions. Primary outcome measures were improvements in safety culture scores using the Teamwork Climate Scale of the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ); 99 ICUs provided baseline SAQ data. Baseline performance for adherence to evidence-based interventions for ventilated patients is also reported. The intervention to improve safety culture was the comprehensive unit-based safety program. The rwg statistic measures the extent to which there is a group consensus. RESULTS Overall response rate for the baseline SAQ was 72%. Statistical tests confirmed that teamwork climate scores provided a valid measure of teamwork climate consensus among caregivers in an ICU, mean rwg was 0.840 (SD = 0.07). Teamwork climate varied significantly among ICUs at baseline (F98, 5325 = 5.90, P < .001), ranging from 16% to 92% of caregivers in an ICU reporting good teamwork climate. A subset of 72 ICUs repeated the culture assessment in 2005, and a 2-tailed paired samples t test showed that teamwork climate improved from 2004 to 2005, t(71) = -2.921, P < .005. Adherence to using evidence-based interventions ranged from a mean of 25% for maintaining glucose at 110 mg/dL or less to 89% for stress ulcer prophylaxis. CONCLUSION This study describes the first statewide effort to improve patient safety in ICUs. The use of the comprehensive unit-based safety program was associated with significant improvements in safety culture. This collaborative may serve as a model to implement feasible and methodologically rigorous methods to improve and sustain patient safety on a larger scale.

How will we know patients are safer? An organization-wide approach to measuring and improving safety

Objective:Our institution, like many, is struggling to develop measures that answer the question, How do we know we are safer? Our objectives are to present a framework to evaluate performance in patient safety and describe how we applied this model in intensive care units. Design:We focus on measures of safety rather than broader measures of quality. The measures will allow health care organizations to evaluate whether they are safer now than in the past by answering the following questions: How often do we harm patients? How often do patients receive the appropriate interventions? How do we know we learned from defects? How well have we created a culture of safety? The first two measures are rate based, whereas the latter two are qualitative. To improve care within institutions, caregivers must be engaged, must participate in the selection and development of measures, and must receive feedback regarding their performance. The following attributes should be considered when evaluating potential safety measures: Measures must be important to the organization, must be valid (represent what they intend to measure), must be reliable (produce similar results when used repeatedly), must be feasible (affordable to collect data), must be usable for the people expected to employ the data to improve safety, and must have universal applicability within the entire institution. Setting:Health care institutions. Results:Health care currently lacks a robust safety score card. We developed four aggregate measures of patient safety and present how we applied them to intensive care units in an academic medical center. The same measures are being applied to nearly 200 intensive care units as part of ongoing collaborative projects. The measures include how often do we harm patients, how often do we do what we should (i.e., use evidence-based medicine), how do we know we learned from mistakes, and how well do we improve culture. Measures collected by different departments can then be aggregated to provide a hospital level safety score card. Conclusion:The science of measuring patient safety is immature. This article is a starting point for developing feasible and scientifically sound approaches to measure safety within an institution. Institutions will need to find a balance between measures that are scientifically sound, affordable, usable, and easily applied across the institution.

Impact of a statewide intensive care unit quality improvement initiative on hospital mortality and length of stay: retrospective comparative analysis.

Objective To evaluate whether implementation of the Michigan Keystone ICU project, a comprehensive statewide quality improvement initiative focused on reduction of infections, was associated with reductions in hospital mortality and length of stay for adults aged 65 or more admitted to intensive care units. Design Retrospective comparative study, using data from Medicare claims. Setting Michigan and Midwest region, United States. Population The study period (October 2001 to December 2006) spanned two years before the project was initiated to 22 months after its implementation. The study sample included hospital admissions for patients treated in 95 study hospitals in Michigan (238 937 total admissions) compared with 364 hospitals in the surrounding Midwest region (1 091 547 total admissions). Main outcome measures Hospital mortality and length of hospital stay. Results The overall trajectory of mortality outcomes differed significantly between the two groups upon implementation of the project (Wald test χ2=8.73, P=0.033). Reductions in mortality were significantly greater for the study group than for the comparison group 1-12 months (odds ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.87 v 0.88, 0.85 to 0.90, P=0.041) and 13-22 months (0.76, 0.72 to 0.81 v 0.84, 0.81 to 0.86, P=0.007) after implementation of the project. The overall trajectory of length of stay did not differ significantly between the groups upon implementation of the project (Wald test χ2=2.05, P=0.560). Group differences in adjusted length of stay compared with baseline did not reach significance during implementation of the project (−0.45 days, 95% confidence interval −0.62 to −0.28 v −0.35, −0.52 to −0.19) or during post-implementation months 1-12 (−0.59, −0.80 to −0.37 v −0.42, −0.59 to −0.25) and 13-22 (−0.67, −0.91 to −0.43 v −0.54, −0.72 to −0.37). Conclusions Implementation of the Keystone ICU project was associated with a significant decrease in hospital mortality in Michigan compared with the surrounding area. The project was not, however, sufficiently powered to show a significant difference in length of stay.

National Study on the Frequency, Types, Causes, and Consequences of Voluntarily Reported Emergency Department Medication Errors

BACKGROUND Medication errors contribute to significant morbidity, mortality, and costs to the health system. Little is known about the characteristics of Emergency Department (ED) medication errors. STUDY OBJECTIVE To examine the frequency, types, causes, and consequences of voluntarily reported ED medication errors in the United States. METHODS A cross-sectional study of all ED errors reported to the MEDMARX system between 2000 and 2004. MEDMARX is an anonymous, confidential, de-identified, Internet-accessible medication error-reporting program designed to allow hospitals to report, track, and share error data in a standardized format. RESULTS There were 13,932 medication errors from 496 EDs analyzed. The error rate was 78 reports per 100,000 visits. Physicians were responsible for 24% of errors, nurses for 54%. Errors most commonly occurred in the administration phase (36%). The most common type of error was improper dose/quantity (18%). Leading causes were not following procedure/protocol (17%), and poor communication (11%), whereas contributing factors were distractions (7.5%), emergency situations (4.1%), and workload increase (3.4%). Computerized provider order entry caused 2.5% of errors. Harm resulted in 3% of errors. Actions taken as a result of the error included informing the staff member who committed the error (26%), enhancing communication (26%), and providing additional training (12%). Patients or family members were notified about medication errors 2.7% of the time. CONCLUSION ED medication errors may be a result of the acute, crowded, and fast-paced nature of care. Further research is needed to identify interventions to reduce these risks and evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions.

Relationship Between Performance Measurement and Accreditation: Implications for Quality of Care and Patient Safety

This study examined the association between the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) accreditation scores and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s Inpatient Quality Indicators and Patient Safety Indicators (IQIs/PSIs). JCAHO accreditation data from 1997 to 1999 were matched with institutional IQI/PSI performance from 24 states in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. Most institutions scored high on JCAHO measures despite IQI/PSI performance variation with no significant relationship between them. Principal component analysis found 1 factor each of the IQIs/PSIs that explained the majority of variance on the IQIs/PSIs. Worse performance on the PSI factor was associated with worse performance on JCAHO scores (P = .02). No significant relationships existed between JCAHO categorical accreditation decisions and IQI/PSI performance. Few relationships exist between JCAHO scores and IQI/PSI performance. There is a need to continuously reevaluate all measurement tools to ensure they are providing the public with reliable, consistent information about health care quality and safety.

Reducing Health Care Hazards: Lessons From The Commercial Aviation Safety Team

The movement to improve quality of care and patient safety has grown, but examples of measurable and sustained progress are rare. The slow progress made in health care contrasts with the success of aviation safety. After a tragic 1995 plane crash, the aviation industry and government created the Commercial Aviation Safety Team to reduce fatal accidents. This public-private partnership of safety officials and technical experts is responsible for the decreased average rate of fatal aviation accidents. We propose a similar partnership in the health care community to coordinate national efforts and move patient safety and quality forward.

Characteristics of pediatric chemotherapy medication errors in a national error reporting database

Little is known regarding chemotherapy medication errors in pediatrics despite studies suggesting high rates of overall pediatric medication errors. In this study, the authors examined patterns in pediatric chemotherapy errors.

Creating the Web-based Intensive Care Unit Safety Reporting System

In an effort to improve patient safety, researchers at the Johns Hopkins University designed and implemented a comprehensive Web-based Intensive Care Unit Safety Reporting System (ICUSRS). The ICUSRS collects data about adverse events and near misses from all staff in the ICU. This report reflects data on 854 reports from 18 diverse ICUs across the United States. Reporting is voluntary, and data collected is confidential, with patient, provider, and reporter information deidentified. Preliminary data include system factors reported, degree of patient harm, reporting times, and evaluations of the system. Qualitative and quantitative data are reported back to the ICU site study teams and frontline staff through monthly reports, case discussions, and a quarterly newsletter.

A system factors analysis of “line, tube, and drain” incidents in the intensive care unit*

Objective:To analyze the system factors related to “line, tube, and drain” (LTD) incidents in the intensive care unit (ICU). Design:Voluntary, anonymous Web-based patient safety reporting system. Setting:Eighteen ICUs in the United States. Patients:Incidents reported by ICU staff members during a 12-month period ending June 2003. Interventions:None. Measurements:Characteristics of the incidents (defined as events that could/did cause harm), patients, and patient harm were described. Separate multivariable logistic regression analyses of contributing, limiting, and preventive system factors for LTD vs. non-LTD incidents were reported. Main Results:Of the 114 reported LTD incidents, >60% were considered preventable. One patient death was attributed to an LTD incident. Of patients experiencing LTD incidents, 56% sustained physical injury, and 23% had an anticipated increased hospital stay. Factors contributing to LTD incidents included occurrence in the operating room (odds ratio [OR], 3.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25–9.83), occurrence on a holiday (OR, 3.65; 95% CI, 1.12–11.9), patient medical complexity (OR, 3.68; 95% CI, 2.28–5.92), and age of 1–9 yrs (OR, 7.95; 95% CI, 3.29–19.2). Factors related to team communication were less likely to limit LTD incidents (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.11–0.68), while clinician knowledge and skills helped prevent LTD incidents (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.09–2.97). Conclusions:Patients are harmed by preventable LTD incidents. Relative to non-LTD events, these incidents occur more frequently during holidays and in medically complex patients and children. Focusing on these contributing factors and clinician knowledge and skills is important for reducing and preventing these hazardous events. LEARNING OBJECTIVESOn completion of this article, the reader should be able to: Describe risk factors for “line, tube, and drain (LTD) incidents.” Explain how to minimize these incidents. Use this information in the clinical setting. Dr. Pronovost has disclosed that he is the recipient of grant/research funding from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and is a consultant for the Patient Safety Group, VHA. The remaining authors have disclosed that they have no financial relationships or interest in any commercial companies pertaining to this educational activity. Wolters Kluwer Health has identified and resolved all faculty conflicts of interest regarding this educational activity. Visit the Critical Care Medicine Web site (www.ccmjournal.org) for information on obtaining continuing medical education credit.

NICU medication errors: identifying a risk profile for medication errors in the neonatal intensive care unit

Objective:To identify a risk profile for harmful medication errors in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).Study Design:A retrospective cross-sectional study on NICU medication error reports submitted to MEDMARX between 1 January 1999, and 31 December 2005. The Rao–Scott modified χ2 test was used for analysis.Result:6749 NICU medication error reports were submitted by 163 health-care facilities. Administering errors accounted for approximately one half of errors, and human factors were the most frequently cited cause of error. Patient age was not associated with an increased likelihood of an error being harmful (P=0.11). Error reports involving Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) High-Alert Medications, occurring in the prescribing phase of medication processing, or involving equipment/delivery device failures were more likely to be harmful (P⩽0.05).Conclusion:Risk factors for harmful medication error reports include use of ISMP High-Alert Medications, the prescribing phase of the medication use process, and failure of equipment/delivery devices.