Medical error and decision making : learning from the past and present in intensive care

Background : Human error occurs in every occupation. Medical errors may result in a near miss or an actual injury to a patient that has nothing to do with the underlying medical condition. Intensive care has one of the highest incidences of medical error and patient injury in any specialty medical area; thought to be related to the rapidly changing patient status and complex diagnoses and treatments.

Purpose : The aims of this paper are to: (1) outline the definition, classifications and aetiology of medical error; (2) summarise key findings from the literature with a specific focus on errors arising from intensive care areas; and (3) conclude with an outline of approaches for analysing clinical information to determine adverse events and inform practice change in intensive care.

Data source : Database searches of articles and textbooks using keywords: medical error, patient safety, decision making and intensive care. Sociology and psychology literature cited therein.

Findings : Critically ill patients require numerous medications, multiple infusions and procedures. Although medical errors are often detected by clinicians at the bedside, organisational processes and systems may contribute to the problem. A systems approach is thought to provide greater insight into the contributory factors and potential solutions to avoid preventable adverse events.

Conclusion : It is recommended that a variety of clinical information and research techniques are used as a priority to prevent hospital acquired injuries and address patient safety concerns in intensive care.

Predictors of chemotherapy patients' intentions to engage in medical error prevention

Patients can make contributions to the safety of chemotherapy administration but little is known about their motivations to participate in safety-enhancing strategies. The theory of planned behavior was applied to analyze attitudes, norms, behavioral control, and chemotherapy patients' intentions to participate in medical error prevention.

Barriers and facilitators to chemotherapy patients' engagement in medical error prevention

Medical errors are a serious threat to chemotherapy patients. Patients can make contributions to safety but little is known about the acceptability of error-preventing behaviors and its predictors.

Medical Error: Is the Solution Medical or Cognitive?

Is the solution for medical errors medical or cognitive? In this AMIA2001 panel on medical error, we argued that medical error is primarily an issue for cognitive science and engineering, not for medicine, although the knowledge of the practice of medicine is essential for the research and prevention of medical errors. The three panelists presented studies that demonstrate that cognitive research is the foundation for theories of medical errors and interventions of error reductions.

Evaluating a medical error taxonomy

Healthcare has been slow in using human factors principles to reduce medical errors. The Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) recognizes that a lack of attention to human factors during product development may lead to errors that have the potential for patient injury, or even death. In response to the need for reducing medication errors, the National Coordinating Council for Medication Errors Reporting and Prevention (NCC MERP) released the NCC MERP taxonomy that provides a standard language for reporting medication errors. This project maps the NCC MERP taxonomy of medication error to MedWatch medical errors involving infusion pumps. Of particular interest are human factors associated with medical device errors. The NCC MERP taxonomy of medication errors is limited in mapping information from MEDWATCH because of the focus on the medical device and the format of reporting.

The physician's perception of medical error and its application to the development of an educational training tool.

It is becoming clear that if we are to impact the rate of medical errors it will have to be done at the practicing physician level. The purpose of this project was to survey the attitude of physicians in Alabama concerning their perception of medical error, and to obtain their thoughts and desires for medical education in the area of medical errors. The information will be used in the development of a physician education program.

In the aftermath of medical error : Caring for patients, family, and the healthcare workers involved

Medical errors, in particular those resulting in harm, pose a serious situation for patients ("first victims") and the healthcare workers involved ("second victims") and can have long-lasting and distressing consequences. To prevent a second traumatization, appropriate and empathic interaction with all persons involved is essential besides error analysis. Patients share a nearly universal, broad preference for a complete disclosure of incidents, regardless of age, gender, or education. This includes the personal, timely and unambiguous disclosure of the adverse event, information relating to the event, its causes and consequences, and an apology and sincere expression of regret. While the majority of healthcare professionals generally support and honest and open disclosure of adverse events, they also face various barriers which impede the disclosure (e.g., fear of legal consequences). Despite its essential importance, disclosure of adverse events in practice occurs in ways that are rarely acceptable to patients and their families. The staff involved often experiences acute distress and an intense emotional response to the event, which may become chronic and increase the risk of depression, burnout and post-traumatic stress disorders. Communication with peers is vital for people to be able to cope constructively and protectively with harmful errors. Survey studies among healthcare workers show, however, that they often do not receive sufficient individual and institutional support. Healthcare organizations should prepare for medical errors and harmful events and implement a communication plan and a support system that covers the requirements and different needs of patients and the staff involved.

Second, do less harm: The state of states' medical error reporting programs

Statement of the problem and public health significance. Hospitals were designed to be a safe haven and respite from disease and illness. However, a large body of evidence points to preventable errors in hospitals as the eighth leading cause of death among Americans. Twelve percent of Americans, or over 33.8 million people, are hospitalized each year. This population represents a significant portion of at risk citizens exposed to hospital medical errors. Since the number of annual deaths due to hospital medical errors is estimated to exceed 44,000, the magnitude of this tragedy makes it a significant public health problem. ^ Specific aims. The specific aims of this study were threefold. First, this study aimed to analyze the state of the states' mandatory hospital medical error reporting six years after the release of the influential IOM report, "To Err is Human." The second aim was to identify barriers to reporting of medical errors by hospital personnel. The third aim was to identify hospital safety measures implemented to reduce medical errors and enhance patient safety. ^ Methods. A descriptive, longitudinal, retrospective design was used to address the first stated objective. The study data came from the twenty-one states with mandatory hospital reporting programs which report aggregate hospital error data that is accessible to the public by way of states' websites. The data analysis included calculations of expected number of medical errors for each state according to IOM rates. Where possible, a comparison was made between state reported data and the calculated IOM expected number of errors. A literature review was performed to achieve the second study aim, identifying barriers to reporting medical errors. The final aim was accomplished by telephone interviews of principal patient safety/quality officers from five Texas hospitals with more than 700 beds. ^ Results. The state medical error data suggests vast underreporting of hospital medical errors to the states. The telephone interviews suggest that hospitals are working at reducing medical errors and creating safer environments for patients. The literature review suggests the underreporting of medical errors at the state level stems from underreporting of errors at the delivery level. ^

Medical error:a discussion of the medical construction of error and suggestions for reforms of medical education to decrease error

Introduction: There is a growing public perception that serious medical error is commonplace and largely tolerated by the medical profession. The Government and medical establishment's response to this perceived epidemic of error has included tighter controls over practising doctors and individual stick-and-carrot reforms of medical practice. Discussion: This paper critically reviews the literature on medical error, professional socialization and medical student education, and suggests that common themes such as uncertainty, necessary fallibility, exclusivity of professional judgement and extensive use of medical networks find their genesis, in part, in aspects of medical education and socialization into medicine. The nature and comparative failure of recent reforms of medical practice and the tension between the individualistic nature of the reforms and the collegiate nature of the medical profession are discussed. Conclusion: A more theoretically informed and longitudinal approach to decreasing medical error might be to address the genesis of medical thinking about error through reforms to the aspects of medical education and professional socialization that help to create and perpetuate the existence of avoidable error, and reinforce medical collusion concerning error. Further changes in the curriculum to emphasize team working, communication skills, evidence-based practice and strategies for managing uncertainty are therefore potentially key components in helping tomorrow's doctors to discuss, cope with and commit fewer medical errors.

Designing Out Medical Error, WCDH Boston 2011

This talk is about using research and design to reduce medical errors. It doesn’t matter whether you deliver healthcare in the old-fashioned pathogenic way, or salutogenically, it all falls apart if systems and protocols let the patient down, and harm them.

The World Health Organization Multi-Professional Patient Safety Curriculum : implementation of key modules and its impact on patient safety knowledge, skills, and attitudes of medical students at the University of Algarve

ABSTRACT - Objectives: We attempted to show how the implementation of the key elements of the World Health Organization Patient Safety Curriculum Guide Multi-professional Edition in an undergraduate curriculum affected the knowledge, skills, and attitudes towards patient safety in a graduate entry Portuguese Medical School. Methods: After receiving formal recognition by the WHO as a Complementary Test Site and approval of the organizational ethics committee , the validated pre-course questionnaires measuring the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to patient safety were administered to the 2nd and3rd year students pursuing a four-year course (N = 46). The key modules of the curriculum were implemented over the academic year by employing a variety of learning strategies including expert lecturers, small group problem-based teaching sessions, and Simulation Laboratory sessions. The identical questionnaires were then administered and the impact was measured. The Curriculum Guide was evaluated as a health education tool in this context. Results: A significant number of the respondents, 47 % (n = 22), reported having received some form of prior patient safety training. The effect on Patient Safety Knowledge was assessed by using the percentage of correct pre- and post-course answers to construct 2 × 2 contingency tables and by applying Fishers’ test (two-tailed). No significant differences were detected (p < 0.05). To assess the effect of the intervention on Patient Safety skills and attitudes, the mean and standard deviation were calculated for the pre and post-course responses, and independent samples were subjected to Mann-Whitney’s test. The attitudinal survey indicated a very high baseline incidence of desirable attitudes and skills toward patient safety. Significant changes were detected (p < 0.05) regarding what should happen if an error is made (p = 0.016), the role of healthcare organizations in error reporting (p = 0.006), and the extent of medical error (p = 0.005). Conclusions: The implementation of selected modules of the WHO Patient Safety Curriculum was associated with a number of positive changes regarding patient safety skills and attitudes, with a baseline incidence of highly desirable patient safety attitudes, but no measureable change on the patient safety knowledge, at the University of Algarve Medical School. The significance of these results is discussed along with implications and suggestions for future research.

Implementation of an audit with feedback knowledge translation intervention to promote medication error reporting in health care: a protocol.

BACKGROUND: Health professionals strive to deliver high-quality care in an inherently complex and error-prone environment. Underreporting of medical errors challenges attempts to understand causative factors and impedes efforts to implement preventive strategies. Audit with feedback is a knowledge translation strategy that has potential to modify health professionals' medical error reporting behaviour. However, evidence regarding which aspects of this complex, multi-dimensional intervention work best is lacking. The aims of the Safe Medication Audit Reporting Translation (SMART) study are to: 1. Implement and refine a reporting mechanism to feed audit data on medication errors back to nurses 2. Test the feedback reporting mechanism to determine its utility and effect 3. Identify characteristics of organisational context associated with error reporting in response to feedback METHODS/DESIGN: A quasi-experimental design, incorporating two pairs of matched wards at an acute care hospital, is used. Randomisation occurs at the ward level; one ward from each pair is randomised to receive the intervention. A key stakeholder reference group informs the design and delivery of the feedback intervention. Nurses on the intervention wards receive the feedback intervention (feedback of analysed audit data) on a quarterly basis for 12 months. Data for the feedback intervention come from medication documentation point-prevalence audits and weekly reports on routinely collected medication error data. Weekly reports on these data are obtained for the control wards. A controlled interrupted time series analysis is used to evaluate the effect of the feedback intervention. Self-report data are also collected from nurses on all four wards at baseline and at completion of the intervention to elicit their perceptions of the work context. Additionally, following each feedback cycle, nurses on the intervention wards are invited to complete a survey to evaluate the feedback and to establish their intentions to change their reporting behaviour. To assess sustainability of the intervention, at 6 months following completion of the intervention a point-prevalence chart audit is undertaken and a report of routinely collected medication errors for the previous 6 months is obtained. This intervention will have wider application for delivery of feedback to promote behaviour change for other areas of preventable error and adverse events.