William Claiborne Dunagan

Characteristics and Circumstances of Falls in a Hospital Setting: A Prospective Analysis

OBJECTIVE: To describe the epidemiology of hospital inpatient falls, including characteristics of patients who fall, circumstances of falls, and fall-related injuries.DESIGN: Prospective descriptive study of inpatient falls. Data on patient characteristics, fall circumstances, and injury were collected through interviews with patients and/or nurses and review of adverse event reports and medical records. Fall rates and nurse staffing levels were compared by service.SETTING: A 1,300-bed urban academic hospital over 13 weeks.PATIENTS: All inpatient falls reported for medicine, cardiology, neurology, orthopedics, surgery, oncology, and women and infants services during the study period were included. Falls in the psychiatry service and falls during physical therapy sessions were excluded.MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 183 patients fell during the study period. The average age of patients who fell was 63.4 years (range 17 to 96). Many falls were unassisted (79%) and occurred in the patient’s room (85%), during the evening/overnight (59%), and during ambulation (19%). Half of the falls (50%) were elimination related, which was more common in patients over 65 years old (83% vs 48%; P<.001). Elimination-related falls increased the risk of fall-related injury (adjusted odds ratio, 2.4; 95% confidence interval 1.1 to 5.3). The medicine and neurology services had the highest fall rates (both were 6.12 falls per 1,000 patient-days), and the highest patient to nurse ratios (6.5 and 5.3, respectively).CONCLUSIONS: Falls in the hospital affect young as well as older patients, are often unassisted, and involve elimination-related activities. Further studies are necessary to prevent hospital falls and reduce fall injury rates.

A Case‐control Study of Patient, Medication, and Care‐related Risk Factors for Inpatient Falls

AbstractOBJECTIVE: To comprehensively analyze potential risk factors for falling in the hospital and describe the circumstances surrounding falls. DESIGN: Case-control study. Data on potential risk factors and circumstances of the falls were collected via interviews with patients and/or nurses and review of adverse event reports, medical records, and nurse staffing records. SETTING: Large urban academic hospital. PATIENTS: Ninety-eight inpatients who fell and 318 controls matched on approximate length of stay until the index fall. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In a multivariate model of patient-related, medication, and care-related variables, factors that were significantly associated with an increased risk of falling included: gait/balance deficit or lower extremity problem (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 9.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0 to 41.0), confusion (aOR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.6 to 8.4), use of sedatives/hypnotics (aOR, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.6 to 11.5), use of diabetes medications (aOR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.3 to 7.9), increasing patient-to-nurse ratio (aOR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.0), and activity level of “up with assistance” compared with “bathroom privileges” (aOR, 8.7; 95% CI, 2.3 to 32.7). Urinary or stool frequency or incontinence was of borderline significance (aOR, 2.3; 95% CI, 0.99 to 5.6). Having one or more side rails raised was associated with a decreased risk of falling (aOR, 0.006; 95% CI, 0.001 to 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Patient health status, especially abnormal gait or lower extremity problems, medications, as well as care-related factors, increase the risk of falling. Fall prevention programs should target patients with these risk factors and consider using frequently scheduled mobilization and toileting, and minimizing use of medications related to falling.

Patterns and predictors of inpatient falls and fall-related injuries in a large academic hospital

OBJECTIVES Most research on hospital falls has focused on predictors of falling, whereas less is known about predictors of serious fall-related injury. Our objectives were to characterize inpatients who fall and to determine predictors of serious fall-related injury. METHODS We performed a retrospective observational study of 1,082 patients who fell (1,235 falls) during January 2001 to June 2002 at an urban academic hospital. Multivariate analysis of potential risk factors for serious fall-related injury (vs no or minor injury) included in the hospitals adverse event reporting database was conducted with logistic regression to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI95) RESULTS The median age of patients who fell was 62 years (interquartile range, 49-77 years), 50% were women, and 20% were confused. The hospital fall rate was 3.1 falls per 1,000 patient-days, which varied by service from 0.86 (women and infants) to 6.36 (oncology). Some (6.1%) of the falls resulted in serious injury, ranging by service from 3.1% (women and infants) to 10.9% (psychiatry). The most common serious fall-related injuries were bleeding or laceration (53.6%), fracture or dislocation (15.9%), and hematoma or contusion (13%). Patients 75 years or older (aOR, 3.2; CI95, 1.3-8.1) and those on the geriatric psychiatry floor (aOR, 2.8; CI95, 1.3-6.0) were more likely to sustain serious fall-related injuries. CONCLUSIONS There is considerable variation in fall rates and fall-related injury percentages by service. More detailed studies should be conducted by floor or service to identify predictors of serious fall-related injury so that targeted interventions can be developed to reduce them.

Understanding patient willingness to recommend and return: a strategy for prioritizing improvement opportunities.

BACKGROUND Beginning in April 1995, an ongoing, comprehensive measurement system has been developed and refined at BJC Health System, a regional integrated delivery and financing system serving the St Louis metropolitan area, mid-Missouri, and Southern Illinois, to assess patient satisfaction with inpatient treatment, outpatient treatment, outpatient surgery, and emergency care. This system has provided the mechanism for identifying opportunities, setting priorities, and monitoring the impact of improvement initiatives. METHODS Satisfaction with key components of the care process among 23,361 patients (7,083 inpatients, 8,885 patients undergoing outpatient tests/procedures, 5,356 patients undergoing outpatient surgery, and 2,037 patients receiving emergency care) at 15 BJC Health System facilities was assessed through weekly surveys administered in April 1995 through December 1996. RESULTS Structural equation models were developed to identify the key predictors of patient advocation-willingness to return for or recommend care. Across all venues of care the compassion provided to patients had the strongest relationship to patient advocation. Within each venue of care, however, a slightly different set of secondary factors emerged. The resulting models provided important information to help prioritize competing improvement opportunities in BJC Health System. In one hospital, a general medicine unit working for several years with little success to improve its patient satisfaction decided to focus on two primary factors predicting patient advocation: nursing care delivery and compassionate care. Root cause analysis was used to determine why two items-staff willingness to help with questions/concerns and clear explanation about tests and procedures-were rated low. On the basis of feedback from phone interviews with discharged patients, the care delivery process was changed to encourage patients to ask questions. Across the next two quarters, this unit experienced significant improvements in both targeted items. DISCUSSION The significance of compassionate care and care delivery again speaks not only to the importance of the technical quality of clinical care but also to the customer-focused way in which this care was provided. After the primary predictors of patient advocation were identified, management was able to strategically focus improvement initiatives to maximize their impact. Across the organization, improvement teams scanned their data to find key factors where performance was lacking. Once these key opportunities were identified, the teams developed potential solutions and launched initiatives to improve their performance. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Results suggest that some core issues are of extreme importance to patients regardless of whether they are receiving care in an inpatient, outpatient, or emergency setting. The compassion with which care is provided appears to be the most important factor in influencing patient intentions to recommend/return, regardless of the setting in which care is provided.

Safe Medication Prescribing: Training and Experience of Medical Students and Housestaff at a Large Teaching Hospital

Purpose To assess medical students’ and housestaffs knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding safe prescribing. Method In 2003, 214 housestaff (interns and residents) and 77 medical students in medicine and surgery at Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri, were asked to complete an anonymous, self-administered questionnaire about safe prescribing. Questions asked about training in and attitudes about safe-prescribing and current prescribing behaviors. Fisher exact test was used to compare attitudes and behaviors among subgroups. Results Of the 175 (60%) respondents, 73 (59%) of 123 housestaff and eight (15%) of 52 students agreed that their safe-prescribing training was adequate (p < .001), and 145 (83%) total respondents agreed that prescribing errors were unacceptable. Respondents reported always doing the following: 156 (89%) checked prescribing information before prescribing new drugs, 131 (75%) checked for drug allergies, 103 (59%) double-checked dosage calculations, 98 (56%) checked for renal impairment, and 53 (30%) checked for potential drug–drug interactions. Conclusion Routine use of safe medication prescribing behaviors among housestaff and medical students was poor. Contributing factors may have included inadequate training and a culture that does not support safe prescribing. Effective strategies to increase safe medication prescribing need to be identified and implemented.

Patient Satisfaction Measurement Strategies: A Comparison of Phone and Mail Methods

BACKGROUND In 1998 the BJC Health System (St Louis) made the decision to migrate its patient satisfaction measurement system from a mail-out/mail-back method to a phone interview method. Out of concern that results obtained by phone would not be comparable with the 4 years of mail-based data, a controlled study was undertaken to directly compare mail and phone responses and to evaluate response rates, patient sample demographics, and patient satisfaction ratings. METHODS Mail and phone responses obtained from parallel random samples selected from inpatient, outpatient test/treatment, outpatient surgery, and emergency service patient populations were compared. Patients were randomly selected to receive a standardized satisfaction survey by either phone or mail 10 to 14 days postdischarge. RESULTS Significantly higher response rates were obtained by telephone then via the mail-based method for all four samples. After adjusting for demographic differences, numerous significant differences in mean scores as well as percentages of excellent and fair or poor responses were observed, and more positive ratings were obtained by phone. DISCUSSION Crude comparisons of satisfaction scores between organizations using phone and mail-based responses may lead to erroneous conclusions about consumer-perceived quality. Organizations that use mixed-mode surveys should conduct careful side-by-side studies of the methods used on the survey of interest and then establish a correction formula to adjust the results for the measurement biases.

The effects of cytomegalovirus serology on graft and recipient survival in cadaveric renal transplantation: Implications for organ allocation.

The potential benefits from allocating donated cadaveric kidneys based on donor and recipient cytomegalovirus (CMV) serology remain controversial. We estimated graft survival and recipient survival using bivariate Kaplan-Meier models and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models for 24,543 first cadaveric renal transplantations performed in the United States between 1989, coinciding with the introduction of ganciclovir, and 1994. The effects of donor and recipient CMV serology were estimated, and the implications of these estimates for CMV-based allocation of cadaveric kidneys were considered. From Kaplan-Meier estimates, the 3-year impact of CMV-seropositive donor kidneys was a 3.6% reduction in graft survival and a 2.4% reduction in recipient survival for CMV-seronegative recipients, and a 3.9% reduction in graft survival and a 3.0% reduction in recipient survival for CMV-seropositive recipients. Multivariate Cox analysis demonstrated an adverse impact of donor CMV seropositivity regardless of recipient CMV status. D-/R- CMV serologic pairs had the best 3-year outcomes, with 73.4% graft survival and 87.7% recipient survival. D+/R+ CMV serologic pairs were found to have the worst 3-year outcomes, with 68.4% graft survival and 83.1% recipient survival, and were significantly worse than D+/R- pairs in terms of recipient survival. The maximum estimated impact of a program allocating donor kidneys to maximize the number of D-/R- CMV serologic pairs, assuming no impact on HLA mismatches, was a 0.1% reduction in aggregate 3-year graft survival and a 0.2% reduction in aggregate recipient survival. An alternative program allocating donor kidneys to minimize the number of D+/R+ pairs had no estimated effect on either graft or recipient survival. We conclude that during the ganciclovir era, CMV continues to have an important impact on first cadaveric renal transplantation. However, even under ideal conditions, CMV-based kidney allocation to either maximize the number of D-/R- pairs or minimize the number of D+/R+ pairs is likely to provide little benefit to the population of cadaveric renal transplant recipients.

Formulary control of antimicrobial usage: What price freedom?

Formulary controls are the most common and probably the most effective method for controlling abuse of antimicrobial agents in hospitalized patients. Such programs may include restriction of both the number of agents available and the way these agents may be used. These programs have been demonstrated to control pharmacy expenditures. Other potential advantages include reductions in the incidence of adverse drug reactions and the antimicrobial resistance among the hospital flora, and improvements in the overall quality of prescribing of antimicrobials. There are few data to document such benefits, however. Potential disadvantages are also poorly documented but include inconvenience for prescribing physicians, increased administrative costs, prescribing errors, and increased antimicrobial resistance. Antimicrobial control programs will likely remain common, but the availability of new information technologies should enable a transition to systems based on concurrent assessment of antimicrobial appropriateness with immediate feedback to the prescribing physician.

Impact of cytomegalovirus serology on graft survival in living related kidney transplantation: Implications for donor selection

BACKGROUND The impact of cytomegalovirus in living related kidney transplantation remains controversial. This study considers the implications of donor and recipient cytomegalovirus (CMV) serology for the selection of living related donor. METHODS Graft survival was estimated by using the bivariate Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis for 7659 living related first transplantations performed in the United States between 1989 and 1994. The effects of donor CMV serology were estimated with respect to recipient CMV serology and compared with human leukocyte antigen (HLA) matching, transplantation, donor, and recipient characteristics. The implications of these estimates for the selection of living related donors were considered. RESULTS From Kaplan-Meier estimates, donor CMV-seropositive kidneys were associated with significantly reduced graft survival for CMV-seronegative recipients (p = 0.0002) but not CMV-seropositive recipients (p = 0.1623). These findings were verified by use of Cox proportional hazards analysis accounting for covariate factors. The impact of donor CMV-seropositive kidneys on CMV-seronegative recipients was similar to one HLA-DR match, greater than one HLA-B match, and significantly greater than one HLA-A match (p = 0.0331). CONCLUSIONS Results identify donor CMV serology as an important determinant of transplantation outcome for living related first kidney transplant recipients who are themselves CMV seronegative. Consideration should be given to donor and recipient CMV serology when selecting an appropriate donor for living related kidney transplantation.

Using root cause analysis to address patient satisfaction and other improvement opportunities.

BACKGROUND Despite the considerable attention that health care organizations are devoting to the measurement of patient satisfaction, there is often confusion about how to systematically use these data to improve an organizations performance. A model to use in applying traditional quality improvement methods and tools to patient satisfaction problems includes five primary steps: (1) identifying opportunities, (2) prioritizing opportunities, (3) conducting root cause analysis, (4) designing and testing potential solutions, and (5) implementing the proposed solution. PATIENT SATISFACTION SURVEYS A satisfaction survey serves best as a high-level screening device, not as a tool to provide highly detailed information about the root causes of patient dissatisfaction. The primary purpose of the survey in the model is to identify improvement opportunities and areas of significant improvement or deterioration. Secondary tools such as brief patient interviews or focus groups may better serve to probe intensively into the problem areas identified by the survey. These tools allow for a direct dialog with the patient to uncover root causes of dissatisfaction and establish potential solutions. DISCUSSION Although the primary focus of this model has been patient satisfaction issues, the basic steps could easily be applied to virtually any improvement opportunity. Improvement teams should commit to a schedule of 90-minute weekly meetings for 7 weeks. The model, a simple translation of traditional improvement methods and tools to address the unique issues facing patient satisfaction improvement teams, can save improvement teams considerable time, resources, and frustration as they design and launch initiatives to improve patient satisfaction.