Performance of trigger tools in identifying adverse drug events in emergency department patients: a validation study

Drug-Event Pairs as Indicators for the Detection of Adverse Drug Reactions during Hospitalization in Routinely Collected Electronic Data Sources

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a common cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. Identification of ADRs in clinical practice, surveillance and research is essential to prevent further harm. The aim of this study was to assess the likelihood of drugs contributing to clinically important inpatient adverse events, in order to provide a list of drug-event pairs indicating ADRs in electronic health record (EHR) data, referred to as "indicators of ADRs". We conducted a consensus process based on the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method for 14 ADRs. Experts were asked to rate the strength of the causal link between adverse events and potentially causative drugs on a 4-point Likert scale. Based on the median rating, drug-event pairs were categorized according to the likelihood of an ADR being present. Drug-event pairs with a median rating of ≥ 3 without disagreement were defined as indicators of certain and probable ADRs. Of the 255 drug-event pairs evaluated, 2 (1%) and 42 (16%) achieved consensus validation that they certainly and probably indicate an ADR. In addition, 137 drug-event pairs were considered as indicators of possible (54%) and 74 drug-event pairs were considered as indicators of unlikely (29%) ADRs. The provided set of content-validated indicators of clinically important inpatient ADRs can be used in clinical practice (e.g., decision support), surveillance (e.g., quality indicators) and research (e.g., outcome measures). They will be implemented in EHR data from German university hospitals to determine the prevalence of ADRs, support efficient use of pharmacist resources, and develop models predicting ADRs.

Development and validation of trigger tools in primary care: A scoping review

In primary care, trigger tools have been utilized to evaluate and identify patient safety events. The use of trigger tools could help clinicians and patients detect adverse events in a patient's medical record. Due to a lack of research on the process development of trigger tools in primary care, the purpose of this scoping review is to investigate the trigger development and validation process in primary care settings. A scoping review methodology was used to map the published literature using the Joanna Briggs Methodology of performing scoping review. We considered only studies published in English in the last five years and included both qualitative and quantitative study designs. The final review included five articles. The primary care and combined primary-secondary care studies are included to gain more knowledge in the process development and validation of trigger tools. The trigger tool development process begins with clearly defining the triggers, which are then programmed into a combined computerized algorithm. The validation process was then carried out in two steps by both physician and non-physician experts for content and concurrent validity. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of the final algorithm were critical in determining the validity of each trigger. This study provided a comprehensive guide to developing trigger tools, emphasizing the importance of precisely defining triggers through a thorough literature review and dual validation process. There were similarities in the development and validation of trigger tools across primary care and hospital settings, allowing primary care to learn from hospital settings.

The Clinical Impact of Hospital-Acquired Adverse Drug Reactions in Older Adults: An Australian Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Hospital-acquired adverse drug reactions (HA-ADRs) are common in older adults. However, there is limited knowledge regarding the association between HA-ADRs and adverse clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the incidence and characteristics of HA-ADRs in older adults, and any association with mortality, length of stay, and readmissions.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Flinders Medical Centre, a large tertiary referral hospital in Adelaide, South Australia. Older adults admitted under the General Medicine and Acute Care of the Elderly units with no previous diagnosis of dementia.

METHODS

All patients had a Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI) assessment performed within 3 days of the admission. Data collected included age, gender, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), length of stay, readmissions, and mortality. HA-ADRs were identified by review of individual discharge summaries. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate associations with clinical outcomes including mortality, length of stay, and readmissions. Exploratory analyses were performed for HA-ADR groups based on Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities System Organ Class and World Health Organization Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classifications that accounted for ≥10% of all HA-ADRs.

RESULTS

There were 737 patients in the cohort with 72 having experienced a HA-ADRs (incidence = 9.8%). Patients with an HA-ADR had increased length of stay and 30-day readmissions compared with those without an HA-ADR. In multivariate analysis, the number of HA-ADRs was associated with in-hospital mortality and length of stay but not post-discharge mortality or readmissions within 30 days. In exploratory analyses, patients with an HA-ADR to antibacterial drugs had significantly higher rates of in-hospital mortality compared with those without these reactions.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The number of HA-ADRs are associated with in-hospital mortality and length of stay in older Australian inpatients. The occurrence of HA-ADRs may be a trigger to offer advice to prescribers to prevent future ADRs to similar agents and proactively manage disease to improve health outcomes.

Active monitoring of antifungal adverse events in hospitalized patients based on Global Trigger Tool method

Background

The increasing prevalence of fungal infections necessitates broader use of antifungal medications. However, the prevalence of adverse drug events (ADEs) restricts their clinical application. This study aimed to develop a reliable ADEs trigger for antifungals to enable proactive ADEs monitoring, serving as a reference for ADEs prevention and control.

Methods

This investigation comprises two phases. Initially, the trigger was established via a literature review, extraction of relevant items, and refinement through Delphi expert consultation. Subsequently, the validity of the trigger was assessed by analyzing hospital records of antifungal drug users from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020. The correlation between each trigger signal and ADEs occurrence was examined, and the sensitivity and specificity of the trigger were evaluated through the spontaneous reporting system (SRS) and Global Trigger Tool (GTT). Additionally, risk factors contributing to adverse drug events (ADEs) resulting from antifungal use were analyzed. Results: Twenty-one preliminary triggers were refined into 21 final triggers after one expert round. In the retrospective analysis, the positive trigger rate was 65.83%, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 28.75%. The incidence of ADEs in inpatients was 28.75%, equating to 44.58 ADEs per 100 admissions and 33.04 ADEs per 1,000 patient days. Predominant ADEs categories included metabolic disturbances, gastrointestinal damage, and skin rashes. ADEs severity was classified into 36 cases at grade 1, 160 at grade 2, and 18 at grade 3. The likelihood of ADEs increased with longer stays, more positive triggers, and greater comorbidity counts.

Conclusion

This study underscores the effectiveness of the GTT in enhancing ADEs detection during antifungal medication use, thereby confirming its value as a monitoring tool.

Establishing a trigger tool based on global trigger tools to identify adverse drug events in obstetric inpatients in China

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women belong to the special population of drug therapy, and their physiological state, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics are significantly different from the general population. Drug safety during pregnancy involves two generations, which is a hot issue widely concerned in the whole society. Global Trigger Tool (GTT) of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) has been wildly used as a patient safety measurement strategy by several institutions and national programs, and the effectiveness had been demonstrated. But only one study reports the use of GTT in obstetric delivery until now. The aim of the study is to establish triggers detecting adverse drug events (ADEs) suitable for obstetric inpatients on the basis of the GTT, to examine the performance of the obstetric triggers in detecting ADEs experienced by obstetric units compared with the spontaneous reporting system and GTT, and to assess the utility and value of the obstetric trigger tool in identifying ADEs of obstetric inpatients.

METHODS

Based on a literature review searched in PubMed and CNKI from January of 1997 to October of 2023, retrospective local obstetric ADEs investigations, relevant obstetric guidelines and the common adverse reactions of obstetric therapeutic drugs were involved to establish the initial obstetric triggers. According to the Delphi method, two rounds of expert questionnaire survey were conducted among 16 obstetric and neonatological physicians and pharmacists until an agreement was reached. A retrospective study was conducted to identity ADEs in 300 obstetric inpatient records at the Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences & Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital from June 1 to September 30, 2018. Two trained junior pharmacists analyzed the first eligible records independently, and the included records reviewed by trained pharmacist and physician to identify ADEs. Sensitivity and specificity of the established obstetric triggers were assessed by the number of ADEs/100 patients and positive predictive value with the spontaneous reporting system (SRS) and GTT. Excel 2010 and SPSS22 were used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Through two rounds of expert investigation, 39 preliminary triggers were established that comprised four modules (12 laboratory tests, 9 medications, 14 symptoms, and 4 outcomes). A total of 300 medical records were reviewed through the obstetric triggers, of which 48 cases of ADEs were detected, with an incidence of ADEs of 16%. Among the 39 obstetric triggers, 22 (56.41%) were positive and 11 of them detected ADEs. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 36.36%, and the number of ADEs/100 patients was 16.33 (95% CI, 4.19-17.81). The ADE detection rate, positive trigger rate, and PPV for the obstetric triggers were significantly augmented, confirming that the obstetric triggers were more specific and sensitive than SRS and GTT.

CONCLUSION

The obstetric triggers were proven to be sensitive and specific in the active monitoring of ADE for obstetric inpatients, which might serve as a reference for ADE detection of obstetric inpatients at medical institutions.

Sharing Adverse Drug Event Reports Between Hospitals and Community Pharmacists to Inform Re-dispensing: An Analysis of Reports and Process Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Adverse drug events (ADEs) are a leading cause of unplanned hospital visits. We designed ActionADE, an online ADE reporting platform, and integrated it with PharmaNet, British Columbia's (BC's) provincial medication dispensing system, to overcome identified barriers in ADE reporting and communicate ADEs to community pharmacies. Our objectives were to characterise ADEs reported in ActionADE, explore associations between patients' age, sex and ADE characteristics, and estimate the re-dispensation rate of culprit medications in community pharmacies.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational study of ADE reporting in four BC hospitals between April 1, 2020 and October 31, 2022. We described the characteristics of ADEs reported into ActionADE, used logistic regression modelling to examine associations between age and sex and ADE characteristics, and calculated rates of avoided culprit drug re-dispensations using community pharmacists' responses to ActionADE alerts.

RESULTS

In total, 3591 ADE reports were initiated by hospital clinicians, 3174 of which were included in this analysis. Serious or life-threatening ADEs resulting in permanent disability, hospitalisation, extended hospitalisation, and/or death accounted for 28.5% (906/3174; 95% CI 27.0-30.1%) of reports. Males were more likely to have non-adherence reported compared to females and experienced life threatening ADEs at a younger age than females. Of 592 patients who had ≥ 1 adverse drug reaction or allergy report (a subset of ADEs) transmitted to community pharmacies, 200 subsequently attempted to re-fill the culprit or a same class drug. Community pharmacists responded to preventative alerts by avoiding re-dispensation in 33.0% (66/200; 95% CI 26.5-39.5%).

INTERPRETATION

ActionADE is the first interoperable system that communicates ADEs via a central medication database to community pharmacies. Every 10th ADE reported in ActionADE and shared to PharmaNet resulted in community pharmacists' avoiding one culprit or same class drug re-exposure. Further research is needed to understand ActionADE's impact on patient and health system outcomes.

Frequency, Characteristics, and Predictive Factors of Adverse Drug Events in an Adult Emergency Department according to Age: A Cross-Sectional Study

Adverse drug events (ADEs) are a major public health concern, given their consequences in terms of morbi-mortality and associated healthcare costs. Many studies have focused on the elderly, who are considered particularly vulnerable in this respect. We aimed to determine and compare the frequency, characteristics, and predictive factors of ADEs according to age in an adult population. A prospective seven-year cross-sectional study was conducted in a university hospital emergency department. Structured medication reviews and ADE detection were performed. Patient data and ADE characteristics were collected. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were performed in two age groups: Group 1 (age < 65 years) and 2 (age ≥ 65 years). Among the 13,653 patients included, 18.4% in Group 1 and 22.6% in Group 2 experienced an ADE. Differences were identified in terms of the ADE type (more ADEs due to noncompliance in Group 1) and ADE symptoms (greater bleeding in Group 2). In the multivariable analysis, several specific predictive factors were identified, including kidney failure and antidiabetic drug use in Group 1 and inappropriate prescription and antithrombotic treatment in Group 2. Analysis by age provided a more refined vision of ADEs as we identified distinct profiles of iatrogenesis. These results will lead to a better detection of ADEs.

Translation and Validation of the Indonesian Version of the Adverse Drug Reaction Severity Level Instruments in Colorectal Cancer Patients

Introduction

Assessment of the severity of adverse drug reaction (ADR) is very rare in Indonesia. The severity of ADR can describe how serious this affects the clinical condition of the patient. In Indonesia, there are no instruments used to measure the severity of ADR.

Purpose

This study aims to translate, pilot test, and validate Hartwig instruments for measuring the severity of ADR in colorectal cancer patients in Indonesia.

Patients and Methods

The translation method was used forward-backward technique from English to Indonesian, then being retranslated from Indonesia to English. The instrument of Indonesian version was used to assess the severity of ADR as the effect of chemotherapy. The assessment was conducted to 10 colorectal cancer patients by 30 health workers. The test validity was done based on content validity ratio (CVR) and content validity index (CVI); meanwhile, the test reliability was based on intraclass coefficient correlation (ICC).

Results

All of the results of CVR present a value of >0.33, while the range of CVI moves between 0.8 to 1.0, which declares that the instrument is valid. The satisfactory alpha value for reliability is 0.996 with signification of 0.197 (p > 0.05) based on ANOVA analysis. Meanwhile, the ICC value of 0.896 indicates a good reliability among raters.

Conclusion

Indonesian version of Hartwig Instrument can be applied in measuring the severity of ADR caused by chemotherapy in colorectal cancer patients.

Point your SmartPhone at the code above. If you have a QR code reader the video abstract will appear. Or use:

https://youtu.be/WTizlX2OIbU

The Trigger Tool Method for Routine Pharmacovigilance: A Retrospective Cohort Study of the Medical Records of Hospitalized Geriatric Patients

OBJECTIVE

The main objective was to assess the feasibility of the trigger tool method for the retrospective detection of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in the Rennes University Hospital. The secondary objective was to describe the performance of the method in terms of positive predictive values (PPVs) and severity or preventability of ADRs.

METHODS

Using the Rennes University Hospital clinical data warehouse, pharmacovigilance experts performed a retrospective review of a random sample of 30 inpatient hospital medical records per month using the triggers "fall" and "delirium" to identify related ADRs among patients 65 years and older in 2018 in the geriatrics department. Using the Z test, we compared the proportion of medical records with a positive (identified) trigger related to an ADR, which were reviewed within 20 minutes using the reference of 50% reviewed within 20 minutes.

RESULTS

Among the 355 medical records reviewed, 222 had at least 1 trigger and 98 at least 1 related ADR. Among the 222 positive trigger medical records, 99.6% were reviewed in under 20 minutes (P < 0.001). The pharmacovigilance assessment took 3 months. The PPVs reached 53.9% (46.0%-61.7%) for falls and 21.0% (14.3%-27.5%) for delirium. Among the ADRs, 80% were serious and 53% were preventable.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the low PPV of the triggers used and the considerable need for technical and human resources, the trigger tool method cannot be used as a routine tool at the pharmacovigilance center. However, it could be implemented occasionally for specific purposes such as monitoring the impact of risk minimization measures to prevent ADRs.

Development and Implementation of an e-Trigger Tool for Adverse Drug Events in a Swiss University Hospital

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to develop and implement an institution-specific trigger tool based on the Institute for Healthcare Improvement medication module trigger tool (IHI MMTT) in order to detect and monitor ADEs.

METHODS

We performed an investigator-driven, single-center study using retrospective and prospective patient data to develop ("development phase") and implement ("implementation phase") an efficient, institution-specific trigger tool based on the IHI MMTT. Complete medical data from 1008 patients hospitalized in 2018 were used in the development phase. ADEs were identified by chart review. The performance of two versions of the tool was assessed by comparing their sensitivities and specificities. Tool A employed only digitally extracted triggers ("e-trigger-tool") while Tool B employed an additional manually extracted trigger. The superior tool - taking efficiency into account - was applied prospectively to 19-22 randomly chosen charts per month for 26 months during the implementation phase.

RESULTS

In the development phase, 189 (19%) patients had ≥1 ADE (total 277 ADEs). The time needed to identify these ADEs was 15 minutes/chart. A total of 203 patients had ≥1 trigger (total 273 triggers - Tool B). The sensitivities and specificities of Tools A and B were 0.41 and 0.86, and 0.43 and 0.86, respectively. Tool A was more time-efficient than Tool B (4 vs 9 minutes/chart) and was therefore used in the implementation phase. During the 26-month implementation phase, 22 patients experienced trigger-identified ADEs and 529 did not. The median number of ADEs per 1000 patient days was 6 (range 0-13). Patients with at least one ADE had a mean hospital stay of 22.3 ± 19.7 days, compared to 8.0 ± 7.6 days for those without an ADE (p = 2.7×10-14).

CONCLUSION

We developed and implemented an e-trigger tool that was specific and moderately sensitive, gave consistent results and required minimal resources.

Development and Validation of a Trigger Tool for Identifying Drug-Related Emergency Department Visits

There are various trigger tools for detecting adverse drug events (ADEs), however, a drug-related emergency department (ED) visit trigger tool (DrEDTT) has not yet been developed. We aimed to develop and validate a DrEDTT with a multi-center cohort. In this cross-sectional study, we developed the DrEDTT consisting of 28 triggers through a comprehensive literature review and three phase expert group discussion. Next, we evaluated the performance of the DrEDTT by applying it to relevant medical records retrieved from four hospitals from January 2016 to June 2016. Two experts performed an in-depth chart review of a 25% of random sample of trigger flagged and unflagged ED visits and a true ADE was determined through causality assessment. Among 66,564 patients who visited the ED for reasons other than traffic accident and trauma during the study period, at least one trigger was found in 21,268 (32.0%) patients. A total of 959 true ADE cases (5.8%) were identified from a randomly selected 25% of ED visit cases. The overall positive predictive value was 14.0% (range: 8.3-66.7%). Sensitivity and specificity of DrEDTT were 77.7% and 70.4%, respectively. In conclusion, this newly developed trigger tool might be helpful to detect ADE-related ED visits.

The Mental Health Trigger Tool: Development and Testing of a Specialized Trigger Tool for Mental Health Settings

OBJECTIVE

Tools generally used in measuring patient safety incidents in general healthcare settings are not considered suitable for mental health settings. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a specialized trigger tool for mental health settings that could detect both traditionally defined adverse events (AEs) and other mental health-related patient safety incidents (MHPSIs).

METHODS

We first defined and categorized AEs and MHPSIs based on existing literature and then developed a trigger list, initially consisting of 50 items, which was subsequently reduced to 25 items after a pilot study. We then explored the properties of this final 25-item trigger tool, the Mental Health Trigger Tool (MHTT), through a retrospective review of 515 patient records with a two-stage review process similar to Global Trigger Tool methodology. We used findings of an alternative method of review which consisted of page-to-page reviews of patient records in the analysis of properties of MHTT.

RESULTS

Using the MHTT, at least one AE was identified in 98 patient records (19%) and at least one MHPSI was identified in 58 patient records (11%). The MHTT had a sensitivity of 98.6% and its specificity was 100%. The probability of finding an AE/MHPSI when any trigger was detected in a patient record with MHTT was 33.8% and that of individual triggers ranged from 0% to 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

The MHTT may offer an effective, practical, and easy-to-use method in identifying and measuring safety incidents in mental health settings.

Prevalence of adverse drug reactions in the primary care setting: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) represent a major cause of iatrogenic morbidity and mortality in patient care. While a substantial body of work has been undertaken to characterise ADRs in the hospital setting, the overall burden of ADRs in the primary care remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the prevalence of ADRs in the primary care setting and factors affecting the heterogeneity of the estimates.

METHODS

Studies were identified through searching of Medline, Embase, CINAHL and IPA databases. We included observational studies that reported information on the prevalence of ADRs in patients receiving primary care. Disease and treatment specific studies were excluded. Quality of the included studies were assessed using Smyth ADRs adapted scale. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled estimate. Potential source of heterogeneity, including age groups, ADRs definitions, ADRs detection methods, study setting, quality of the studies, and sample size, were investigated using sub-group analysis and meta-regression.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies with a total study population of 1,568,164 individuals were included. The pooled prevalence of ADRs in the primary care setting was 8.32% (95% CI, 7.82, 8.83). The percentage of preventable ADRs ranged from 12.35-37.96%, with the pooled estimate of 22.96% (95% CI, 7.82, 38.09). Cardiovascular system drugs were the most commonly implicated medication class. Methods of ADRs detection, age group, setting, and sample size contributed significantly to the heterogeneity of the estimates.

CONCLUSION

ADRs constitute a significant health problem in the primary care setting. Further research should focus on examining whether ADRs affect subsequent clinical outcomes, particularly in high-risk therapeutic areas. This information may better inform strategies to reduce the burden of ADRs in the primary care setting.

An evaluation of trigger tool method for adverse drug reaction monitoring at a tertiary care teaching hospital

Objectives:

The objective of this study is to evaluate the trigger tool method (TTM) in detection, monitoring, and reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) at Civil Hospital Ahmedabad, India.

Materials and Methods:

A prospective, single-center, observational cum intervention study was conducted in two phases in the Department of Medicine over 15 months. In phase I, preliminary trigger tool list (PTTL) comprising 55 triggers was evaluated by pharmacologist in terms of detection of ADR in 400 patients and then, modified trigger tool list (MTTL) was prepared. In Phase II, the TTM using MTTL was compared with the spontaneous method of ADR monitoring after educational interventions in resident doctors of the two units of medicine department.

Results:

Of the 55 triggers in PTTL, 34 triggers were observed in 327 patients, of which 19 triggers lead to the detection of 66 ADRs. The rate of ADEs was 16.5%/100 patients. Positive predictive value (PPV) of each trigger ranged from 0% to 100%. PPV for drug trigger, laboratory trigger, and PT was 14.4%, 4.5%, and 23.3%, respectively. Overall, PPV of PTTL was 19.27%. Sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 21.66%, respectively. MTTL consists of these 19 triggers. In Phase II, resident doctors reported 16 ADRs, using spontaneous method and 23 ADRs using MTTL. The rate of ADEs per 100 patients was 1.63 and 2.13, respectively, with these methods. A total of 105 ADRs were reported during both phases.

Conclusion:

TTM is an effective method of ADR reporting if it is utilized by a trained person. This method could be used as add-on method to spontaneous method to improve ADR reporting.

Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Measurement Properties of the Portuguese Version of the Global Trigger Tool for Adverse Events

Purpose

To adapt and validate the Global Trigger Tool (IHI-GTT), which identifies and analyzes adverse events (AE) in hospitalized patients and their measurement properties in the Portuguese context.

Methods

A retrospective cross-sectional study was based on a random sample of 90 medical records. The stages of translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the IHI-GTT were based on the Cross-Cultural Adaptation Protocol that originated from the Portuguese version, GTT-PT, for the hospital context in medical-surgical departments. Internal consistency, reliability, reproducibility, diagnostic tests, and discriminatory predictive value were investigated.

Results

The final phase of the GTT-PT showed insignificant inconsistencies. The pre-test phase confirmed translation accuracy, easy administration, effectiveness in identifying AEs, and relevance of integrating it into hospital risk management. It had a sensitivity of 97.8% and specificity of 74.8%, with a cutoff point of 0.5, an accuracy of 83%, and a positive predictive value of 69.8% and a negative predictive value of 0.98%.

Conclusion

The GTT-PT is a reliable, accurate, and valid tool to identify AE, with robust measurement properties.

Alert Override Patterns With a Medication Clinical Decision Support System in an Academic Emergency Department: Retrospective Descriptive Study

Background

Physicians’ alert overriding behavior is considered to be the most important factor leading to failure of computerized provider order entry (CPOE) combined with a clinical decision support system (CDSS) in achieving its potential adverse drug events prevention effect. Previous studies on this subject have focused on specific diseases or alert types for well-defined targets and particular settings. The emergency department is an optimal environment to examine physicians’ alert overriding behaviors from a broad perspective because patients have a wider range of severity, and many receive interdisciplinary care in this environment. However, less than one-tenth of related studies have targeted this physician behavior in an emergency department setting.

Objective

The aim of this study was to describe alert override patterns with a commercial medication CDSS in an academic emergency department.

Methods

This study was conducted at a tertiary urban academic hospital in the emergency department with an annual census of 80,000 visits. We analyzed data on the patients who visited the emergency department for 18 months and the medical staff who treated them, including the prescription and CPOE alert log. We also performed descriptive analysis and logistic regression for assessing the risk factors for alert overrides.

Results

During the study period, 611 physicians cared for 71,546 patients with 101,186 visits. The emergency department physicians encountered 13.75 alerts during every 100 orders entered. Of the total 102,887 alerts, almost two-thirds (65,616, 63.77%) were overridden. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses identified 21 statistically significant risk factors for emergency department physicians’ alert override behavior.

Conclusions

In this retrospective study, we described the alert override patterns with a medication CDSS in an academic emergency department. We found relatively low overrides and assessed their contributing factors, including physicians’ designation and specialty, patients’ severity and chief complaints, and alert and medication type.

Understanding adverse drug-related emergency department visits: development of a conceptual model through a systematic review

Background

The burden of adverse drug event (ADE)-related emergency department (ED) visits is increasing despite several preventive measures. The objective of this paper was to develop and validate a conceptual model for a better understanding of ADE-related ED visits and to guide the design and implementation of effective interventions.

Methods

The development of the model involved a systematic review of the literature using PubMed and Embase databases. Studies reporting the risk factors associated with ADE-related ED visits were included. The methodological qualities of the included studies were assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The model was mapped and validated using face and content validity by an expert panel. Deficiencies and targeted interventions were identified, and steps for the design and implementation were recommended.

Results

The literature search generated 1361 articles, of which 38 were included in the review; 41 risk factors associated with ADE-related ED visits were identified. All factors were mapped, and the model was validated through face and content validity. The model consisted of six concepts related to sociodemographic factors, clinical factors, ADE-related to ED visits, ADE while in the ED, outcomes, and consequences. Interventions could be targeted at the factors identified in each concept to prevent ADE-related ED burden.

Conclusion

A conceptual model to guide the successful design and implementation of strategies to prevent ADE-related ED visits and the occurrence of ADE at ED was developed. Clinicians should take these factors into consideration to prevent untoward events, especially when treating high-risk patients.

Use of triggers tools to search for adverse drug reactions in the elderly admitted to emergency departments

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) can cause illness, disability or death, especially in the elderly. An active search for suspected ADRs was carried out using triggers, which motivated the search of elderly people under care in adult emergency departments (ED). It was a cross-sectional and retrospective study that used an adaptation of the Institute of Health Care Improvement triggers. A total of 287 medical records were analyzed and 38 triggers were found, identifying 7 suspected ADRs. One was found without the use of triggers. Thus, in total, 8 ADRs (2.79%) were found, of which 6 were considered serious. There was a higher prevalence of ADRs in females (62.5%) and in those over 80 years of age (50%). The medications most implicated were those for alimentary tract and metabolism and cardiovascular system. Of the triggers tested, some are essential for use at EDs, such as those that indicate problems with anticoagulants, hypoglycemic agents and antihypertensives. Triggers have proved useful for an active search for suspected ADRs at EDs, including severe ones, identifying problems occurring outside hospital settings and signaling medications that pose an increased risk to the elderly .

Evaluation of accuracy of IHI Trigger Tool in identifying adverse drug events: a prospective observational study

AIMS

Adverse drug events (ADEs) can seriously compromise the safety and quality of care provided to hospitalized patients, requiring the adoption of accurate methods to monitor them. We sought to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of the triggers proposed by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) for identifying ADEs.

METHODS

A prospective study was conducted in a public university hospital in 2015 with patients over the age of 18. Triggers proposed by IHI and clinical alterations suspected to be ADEs were searched daily. The number of days in which the patient was hospitalized was considered as unit of measure to evaluate the accuracy of each trigger.

RESULTS

A total of 300 patients were included in this study. Mean age was 56.3 years (standard deviation (SD) 16.0), and 154 (51.3%) were female. The frequency of patients with ADEs was 24.7% and with at least one trigger was 53.3%. From those patients who had at least one trigger, the most frequent triggers were antiemetics (57.5%) and 'abrupt medication stop' (31.8%). The sensitivity of triggers ranged from 0.3 to 11.8% and the positive predictive value ranged from 1.2 to 27.3%. Specificity and negative predictive value were greater than 86%. Most patients identified by the presence of triggers did not have ADEs (64.4%). No triggers were identified in 40 (38.5%) ADEs.

CONCLUSIONS

IHI Trigger Tool did not show good accuracy in detecting ADEs in this prospective study. The adoption of combined strategies could enhance effectiveness in identifying patient safety flaws. Further discussion might contribute to improve trigger usefulness in clinical practice.

Détection d’événements indésirables par la méthode des trigger tools à partir des dossiers de régulation au sein d’un CRRA 15

Objectif : La méthode dite des trigger tools permet une analyse objective, rapide et fiable des risques portant sur l’examen de dossiers de patients ciblés afin de mettre en évidence des d’événements indésirables (EI) évitables ou porteurs de risques (EPR). L’intérêt de cette méthode n’a jamais été étudié dans le cadre d’un centre de réception et de régulation des appels 15 (CRRA 15). L’objectif était d’évaluer la pertinence de triggers choisis au sein d’un CRRA 15 afin de mettre en place un système de détection d’EI par la méthode des trigger tools.

Matériel et méthodes : Au sein du SAMU 31, au CHU de Toulouse, les dossiers de régulation (DR) étaient extraits en cas de déclenchement de triggers prédéfinis : délais de départ SMUR, délais d’arrivée, temps de prise en charge sur place, délais de décision d’envoi d’une équipe SMUR après le premier appel, patients décédés et réorientations des patients dans les 48 heures. Le critère de jugement principal était le pourcentage d’EI évitables et d’EPR, parmi les patients dont le dossier a déclenché un trigger donné, c’est-à-dire la prévalence du trigger. Les critères de jugement secondaires étaient la gravité de chaque EI évitable selon l’AHRQ severity scale et les facteurs favorisant leur survenue.

Résultats : Du 9 juillet 2011 au 13 avril 2012, 174 536 DR ont été traités, 4 404 (2,5 %) ont déclenché un trigger (soit 2 882 patients). On retrouvait 203 DR avec un EI, qui concernaient 153 patients ; 73 présentaient un EI évitable, 16 un EPR, 30 un EI non évitable. La prévalence de chaque trigger était de 17,6 % (IC 95 % : 4,8–20,4 %) pour celui « délai de départ », 6,7 % (IC 95 % : 3,7–9,7 %) pour le trigger « réorientation précoce », 6,4 % (IC 95 % : 4,6– 8,2 %) pour celui « délai de décision SMUR », 3,4 % (IC 95 % : 0,1–7,2 %) pour le trigger « temps sur place », 2,9 % (IC 95 % : 0,1–8,5 %) pour celui « délai d’arrivée » et 3 % (IC 95 % : 1,5–4,5 %) pour le trigger « décès ».

Conclusion : Les triggers qui semblaient les plus pertinents étaient donc « délai de décision SMUR », « réorientation précoce » et « décès ». La méthode des trigger tools permet une analyse rapide et efficace des DR, essentielle pour réduire le risque et améliorer la qualité de prise en charge des patients.

Why Clinicians Don't Report Adverse Drug Events: Qualitative Study

Background

Adverse drug events are unintended and harmful events related to medications. Adverse drug events are important for patient care, quality improvement, drug safety research, and postmarketing surveillance, but they are vastly underreported.

Objective

Our objectives were to identify barriers to adverse drug event documentation and factors contributing to underreporting.

Methods

This qualitative study was conducted in 1 ambulatory center, and the emergency departments and inpatient wards of 3 acute care hospitals in British Columbia between March 2014 and December 2016. We completed workplace observations and focus groups with general practitioners, hospitalists, emergency physicians, and hospital and community pharmacists. We analyzed field notes by coding and iteratively analyzing our data to identify emerging concepts, generate thematic and event summaries, and create workflow diagrams. Clinicians validated emerging concepts by applying them to cases from their clinical practice.

Results

We completed 238 hours of observations during which clinicians investigated 65 suspect adverse drug events. The observed events were often complex and diagnosed over time, requiring the input of multiple providers. Providers documented adverse drug events in charts to support continuity of care but never reported them to external agencies. Providers faced time constraints, and reporting would have required duplication of documentation.

Conclusions

Existing reporting systems are not suited to capture the complex nature of adverse drug events or adapted to workflow and are simply not used by frontline clinicians. Systems that are integrated into electronic medical records, make use of existing data to avoid duplication of documentation, and generate alerts to improve safety may address the shortcomings of existing systems and generate robust adverse drug event data as a by-product of safer care.

Antihypertensive-related adverse drug reactions among older hospitalized adults

Background Antihypertensive medications are commonly used for a wide range of indications, yet it is unknown to what extent older adults are at risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with their antihypertensive medication use. Objective The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and characteristics of antihypertensive-related ADRs on hospital admission. Setting Metropolitan teaching hospital in Sydney, Australia. Method A retrospective cross-sectional audit of 503 older patients (≥ 65 years) admitted to hospital was conducted. Potential ADRS were identified from the medical record. Two independent clinical pharmacists reviewed each potential ADR using validated tools for causality, severity, preventability and contribution to hospitalization. Characteristics associated with an increased ADR risk among antihypertensive users were identified via logistic regression. Main outcome measure Antihypertensive related ADRs. Results Antihypertensives were used on admission by 68% of the cohort and the prevalence of 'definite/probable' antihypertensive-related ADRs among antihypertensive users was 16.4%. Antihypertensive medications were associated with a threefold ADR risk (OR = 3.09, 95% CI 1.85-5.16). Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers (ARB), impaired renal function, recent medication changes and previous history of allergy or ADR were all associated with an increased risk of experiencing an ADR. Conclusions ADRS associated with antihypertensive medicines were relatively common among older adults admitted to hospital. Increased awareness of those older persons who are most at risk of experiencing an antihypertensive-related ADR in the clinical setting may lead to early detection and minimization of ADR associated harms.

Automated Screening of Emergency Department Notes for Drug-Associated Bleeding Adverse Events Occurring in Older Adults

Objective To conduct research to show the value of text mining for automatically identifying suspected bleeding adverse drug events (ADEs) in the emergency department (ED). Methods A corpus of ED admission notes was manually annotated for bleeding ADEs. The notes were taken for patients ≥ 65 years of age who had an ICD-9 code for bleeding, the presence of hemoglobin value ≤ 8 g/dL, or were transfused > 2 units of packed red blood cells. This training corpus was used to develop bleeding ADE algorithms using Random Forest and Classification and Regression Tree (CART). A completely separate set of notes was annotated and used to test the classification performance of the final models using the area under the ROC curve (AUROC). Results The best performing CART resulted in an AUROC on the training set of 0.882. The model's AUROC on the test set was 0.827. At a sensitivity of 0.679, the model had a specificity of 0.908 and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.814. It had a relatively simple and intuitive structure consisting of 13 decision nodes and 14 leaf nodes. Decision path probabilities ranged from 0.041 to 1.0. The AUROC for the best performing Random Forest method on the training set was 0.917. On the test set, the model's AUROC was 0.859. At a sensitivity of 0.274, the model had a specificity of 0.986 and a PPV of 0.92. Conclusion Both models accurately identify bleeding ADEs using the presence or absence of certain clinical concepts in ED admission notes for older adult patients. The CART model is particularly noteworthy because it does not require significant technical overhead to implement. Future work should seek to replicate the results on a larger test set pulled from another institution.

Performance of trigger tools in identifying adverse drug events in emergency department patients: a validation study

AIMS

Trigger tools are retrospective surveillance methods that can be used to identify adverse drug events (ADEs), unintended and harmful effects of medications, in medical records. Trigger tools are used in quality improvement, public health surveillance and research activities. The objective of the study was to evaluate the performance of trigger tools in identifying ADEs.

METHODS

This study was a sub-study of a prospective cohort study which enrolled adults presenting to one tertiary care emergency department. Clinical pharmacists evaluated patients for ADEs at the point-of-care. Twelve months after the prospective study's completion, the patients' medical records were reviewed using eight different trigger tools. ADEs identified using each trigger tool were compared with events identified at the point-of-care. The primary outcome was the sensitivity of each trigger tool for ADEs.

RESULTS

Among 1151 patients, 152 (13.2%, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 11.4, 15.3%) were diagnosed with one or more ADEs at the point-of-care. The sensitivity of the trigger tools for detecting ADEs ranged from 2.6% (95% CI 0.7, 6.6%) to 15.8% (95% CI 10.6, 22.8%). Their specificity varied from 99.3% (95% CI 98.6, 99.7) to 100% (95% CI 99.6, 100%).

CONCLUSION

The trigger tools examined had poor sensitivity for identifying ADEs in emergency department patients, when applied manually and in retrospect. Reliance on these methods to detect ADEs for quality improvement, surveillance, and research activities is likely to underestimate their occurrence, and may lead to biased estimates.

Designing an Adverse Drug Event Reporting System to Prevent Unintentional Reexposures to Harmful Drugs: Study Protocol for a Multiple Methods Design

Background

Adverse drug events (ADEs) are unintended and harmful events related to medication use. Up to 30% of serious ADEs recur within six months because culprit drugs are unintentionally represcribed and redispensed. Improving the electronic communication of ADE information between care providers, and across care settings, has the potential to reduce recurrent ADEs.

Objective

We aim to describe the methods used to design Action ADE, a novel electronic ADE reporting system that can be leveraged to prevent unintentional reexposures to harmful drugs in British Columbia, Canada.

Methods

To develop the new system, our team will use action research and participatory design, approaches that employ social scientific research methods and practitioner participation to generate insights into work settings and problem resolution. We will develop a systematic search strategy to review existing ADE reporting systems identified in academic and grey literature, and analyze the content of these systems to identify core data fields used to communicate ADE information. We will observe care providers in the emergency departments and on the wards of two urban tertiary hospitals and one urban community hospital, in one rural ambulatory care center, and in three community pharmacies in British Columbia, Canada. We will also conduct participatory workshops with providers to understand their needs and priorities related to communicating ADEs and preventing erroneous represcribing or redispensing of culprit medications. These methods will inform the iterative development of a preliminary paper-based reporting form, which we will then pilot test with providers in a real-world setting.

Results

This is an ongoing project with results being published as analyses are completed. The systematic review has been completed; field observations, focus groups, and pilot testing of a preliminary paper-based design are ongoing. Results will inform the development of software that will enable clinically useful user-friendly documentation and communication of ADEs.

Conclusions

We take this approach with the recognition that information technology-based solutions in health care often fall short of expectations as a result of designers’ failure to account for organizational and work practice considerations, and the needs of end-users. We describe how integrating qualitative methods into an iterative participatory design process (planned in partnership with end-users) will allow us to address specific clinical needs, conceptualize linkages between systems, integrate the reporting system into clinicians’ workflow, and design the system to optimize its uptake into practice.