Outpatient falls prevention program outcome: an increase, a plateau, and a decrease in incident reports

Defining and evaluating the Hawthorne effect in primary care, a systematic review and meta-analysis

In 2015, we conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in primary care to evaluate if posters and pamphlets dispensed in general practice waiting rooms enhanced vaccination uptake for seasonal influenza. Unexpectedly, vaccination uptake rose in both arms of the RCT whereas public health data indicated a decrease. We wondered if the design of the trial had led to a Hawthorne effect (HE). Searching the literature, we noticed that the definition of the HE was unclear if stated. Our objectives were to refine a definition of the HE for primary care, to evaluate its size, and to draw consequences for primary care research. We designed a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses review and meta-analysis between January 2012 and March 2022. We included original reports defining the HE and reports measuring it without setting limitations. Definitions of the HE were collected and summarized. Main published outcomes were extracted and measures were analyzed to evaluate odds ratios (ORs) in primary care. The search led to 180 records, reduced on review to 74 for definition and 15 for quantification. Our definition of HE is "an aware or unconscious complex behavior change in a study environment, related to the complex interaction of four biases affecting the study subjects and investigators: selection bias, commitment and congruence bias, conformity and social desirability bias and observation and measurement bias." Its size varies in time and depends on the education and professional position of the investigators and subjects, the study environment, and the outcome. There are overlap areas between the HE, placebo effect, and regression to the mean. In binary outcomes, the overall OR of the HE computed in primary care was 1.41 (95% CI: [1.13; 1.75]; I 2 = 97%), but the significance of the HE disappears in well-designed studies. We conclude that the HE results from a complex system of interacting phenomena and appears to some degree in all experimental research, but its size can considerably be reduced by refining study designs.

A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review of the Effectiveness and Experiences of Quality Improvement Interventions in Radiology

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compile and synthesize evidence regarding the effectiveness of quality improvement interventions in radiology and the experiences and perspectives of staff and patients.

METHODS

Databases searched for both published and unpublished studies were as follows: EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Joanna Briggs Institute, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Mednar, Trove, Google Gray, OCLC WorldCat, and Dissertations and Theses. This review included both qualitative and quantitative studies of patients undergoing radiological examinations and/or medical imaging health care professionals; a broad range of quality improvement interventions including introduction of health information technology, effects of training and education, improved reporting, safety programs, and medical devices; the experiences and perspectives of staff and patients; context of radiological setting; a broad range of outcomes including patient safety; and a result-based convergent synthesis design.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were selected from 4846 identified by a systematic literature search. Five groups of interventions were identified: health information technology (n = 6), training and education (n = 6), immediate and critical reporting (n = 3), safety programs (n = 2), and the introduction of mobile radiography (n = 1), with demonstrated improvements in outcomes, such as improved operational and workflow efficiency, report turnaround time, and teamwork and communication.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings were constrained by the limited range of interventions and outcome measures. Further research should be conducted with study designs that might produce findings that are more generalizable, examine the other dimensions of quality, and address the issues of cost and risk versus benefit.

Exploring Risk, Antecedents and Human Costs of Living with a Retained Surgical Item: A Narrative Synthesis of Australian Case Law 1981-2018

Objectives

This study aimed to critically examine the circumstances contributing to, and the human costs arising from, the retention of surgical items through the lens of Australian case law.

Design Setting and Participants

We reviewed Australian cases from 1981 to 2018 to establish a pattern of antecedents and identify long-term patient impacts (human costs) of retained surgical items. We used a modified four-step process to conduct a systematic review of legal doctrine, combined with a narrative synthesis approach to bring the information together for understanding. We searched LexisNexis, AustLII, Coroner Court websites, Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency Tribunal Decisions and Panel Hearings, Civil and Administrative Tribunal summaries, and other online sources for publicly available civil cases, medical disciplinary cases, coronial cases, and criminal cases across all Australian jurisdictions.

Results

Ten cases met the inclusion criteria, including one coronial case, three civil appeal cases, and six civil first instance cases. Time from item retention to discovery ranged from 12 days to 20 years, with surgical sponges the most frequently retained item. Five case reports indicated possible deviations from standard protocols regarding counting procedures and record-keeping. In the four cases that reported on count status, the count was deemed correct at the end of surgery. Case reports also showed the human costs of retained surgical items, that is, the long-term impacts on patients associated with a retained surgical item. In eight of the nine civil cases, ongoing pain was the most frequently reported physical symptom; in three cases, patients suffered psychosocial symptoms requiring treatment.

Conclusion

While there was little uniformity in the items retained or how items came to be retained, we identified significant time delays between item retention and item discovery, coupled with long-lasting physical and psychosocial harms suffered by patients living with a retained surgical item. Current prevention strategies, including national standards-based professional practices, are not always effective in preventing retained surgical items. An internationally standardised taxonomy and reporting criteria, more consistent reporting, and open access to event and risk data could inform a more accurate global estimate of risk and incidence of this hospital-acquired complication.

The Association of Falls with Instability: An Analysis of Perceptions and Expectations toward the Use of Fall Detection Devices Among Older Adults in Malaysia

Background: Falls are a significant incident among older adults affecting one in every three individuals aged 65 and over. Fall risk increases with age and other factors, namely instability. Recent studies on the use of fall detection devices in the Malaysian community are scarce, despite the necessity to use them. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the association between the prevalence of falls with instability. This study also presents a survey that explores older adults' perceptions and expectations toward fall detection devices.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted involving 336 community-dwelling older adults aged 50 years and older; based on randomly selected participants. Data were analyzed using quantitative descriptive analysis. Chi-square test was conducted to investigate the associations between self-reported falls with instability, demographic and walking characteristics. Additionally, older adults' perceptions and expectations concerning the use of fall detection devices in their daily lives were explored.

Results: The prevalence of falls was 28.9%, where one-quarter of older adults fell at least once in the past 6 months. Participants aged 70 years and older have a higher fall percentage than other groups. The prevalence of falls was significantly associated with instability, age, and walking characteristics. Around 70% of the participants reported having instability issues, of which over half of them fell at least once within 6 months. Almost 65% of the participants have a definite interest in using a fall detection device. Survey results revealed that the most expected features for a fall detection device include: user-friendly, followed by affordably priced, and accurate.

Conclusions: The prevalence of falls in community-dwelling older adults is significantly associated with instability. Positive perceptions and informative expectations will be used to develop an enhanced fall detection incorporating balance monitoring system. Our findings demonstrate the need to extend the fall detection device features aiming for fall prevention intervention.

Innovating Fall Safety: Engaging Patients as Experts

BACKGROUND

Injury falls are common, with nearly a million hospitalized patients falling annually. Fall risk identification and prevention are largely clinician-centric, lacking patient input.

LOCAL PROBLEM

Our fall rates were below the national mean; however, patients who fell and sustained injury were at or above the mean. We lacked processes that engaged patients as safety collaborators.

METHODS

This was a quality improvement study examining the effect of a collaborative fall intervention on (1) patient knowledge in action and (2) incidence of falls.

INTERVENTION

The patient fall assessment tool was implemented to facilitate collaborative safety conversations.

RESULTS

We achieved a statistically significant improvement (P = .0007) in the patient's participation in the development of the safety plan, with a 25% reduction in total falls and a 67% reduction in injury falls.

CONCLUSIONS

The patient fall assessment tool may be a successful strategy to engage patients in the development of their safety plan and positively affect safety partnerships.

Identification of quality improvement areas in pediatric MRI from analysis of patient safety reports

BACKGROUND

Analysis of safety reports has been utilized to guide practice improvement efforts in adult magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Data specific to pediatric MRI could help target areas of improvement in this population.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the incidence of safety reports in pediatric MRI and to determine associated risk factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a retrospective HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study, a single-institution Radiology Information System was queried to identify MRI studies performed in pediatric patients (0-18 years old) from 1/1/2010 to 12/31/2015. The safety report database was queried for events matching the same demographic and dates. Data on patient age, gender, location (inpatient, outpatient, emergency room [ER]), and the use of sedation/general anesthesia were recorded. Safety reports were grouped into categories based on the cause and their severity. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize continuous variables. Chi-square analyses were performed for univariate determination of statistical significance of variables associated with safety report rates. A multivariate logistic regression was used to control for possible confounding effects.

RESULTS

A total of 16,749 pediatric MRI studies and 88 safety reports were analyzed, yielding a rate of 0.52%. There were significant differences in the rate of safety reports between patients younger than 6 years (0.89%) and those older (0.41%) (P<0.01), sedated (0.8%) and awake children (0.45%) (P<0.01), and inpatients (1.1%) and outpatients (0.4%) (P<0.01). The use of sedation/general anesthesia is an independent risk factor for a safety report (P=0.02). The most common causes for safety reports were service coordination (34%), drug reactions (19%), and diagnostic test and ordering errors (11%).

CONCLUSION

The overall rate of safety reports in pediatric MRI is 0.52%. Interventions should focus on vulnerable populations, such as younger patients, those requiring sedation, and those in need of acute medical attention.

Key Principles in Quality and Safety in Radiology

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to introduce the reader to basic concepts of quality and safety in radiology.

CONCLUSION

Concepts are introduced that are keys to identifying, understanding, and utilizing certain quality tools with the aim of making process improvements. Challenges, opportunities, and change drivers can be mapped from the radiology quality perspective. Best practices, informatics, and benchmarks can profoundly affect the outcome of the quality improvement initiative we all aim to achieve.

Rating and Classification of Incident Reporting in Radiology in a Large Academic Medical Center

The purpose of this article is to provide a rate of safety incident report of adverse events in a large academic radiology department and to share the various types that may occur. This is a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliant, institutional review board-approved study. Consent requirement was waived. All incident reports from April 2006-September 2012 were retrieved. Events were further classified as follows: diagnostic test orders, identity document or documentation or consent, safety or security or conduct, service coordination, surgery or procedure, line or tube, fall, medication or intravenous safety, employee general incident, environment or equipment, adverse drug reaction (ADR), skin or tissue, and diagnosis or treatment. Overall rates and subclassification rates were calculated. There were 10,224 incident reports and 4,324,208 radiology examinations (rate = 0.23%). The highest rates of the incident reports were due to diagnostic test orders (34.3%; 3509/10,224), followed by service coordination (12.2%; 1248/10,224) and ADR (10.3%; 1052/4,324,208). The rate of incident reporting was highest in inpatient (0.30%; 2949/970,622), followed by emergency radiology (0.22%; 1500/672,958) and outpatient (0.18%; 4957/2,680,628). Approximately 48.5% (4947/10,202) of incidents had no patient harm and did not affect the patient, followed by no patient harm, but did affect the patient (35.2%, 3589/10,202), temporary or minor patient harm (15.5%, 1584/10,202), permanent or major patient harm (0.6%, 62/10,202), and patient death (0.2%, 20/10,202). Within an academic radiology department, the rate of incident reports was only 0.23%, usually did not harm the patient, and occurred at higher rates in inpatients. The most common incident type was in the category of diagnostic test orders, followed by service coordination, and ADRs.

How often are Patients Harmed When They Visit the Computed Tomography Suite? A Multi-year Experience, in Incident Reporting, in a Large Academic Medical Center

OBJECTIVES

Our goal is to present our multi-year experience in incident reporting in CT in a large medical centre.

METHODS

This is an IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant study. Informed consent was waived for this study. The electronic safety incident reporting system of our hospital was searched for the variables from April 2006 to September 2012. Incident classifications were diagnostic test orders, ID/documentation, safety/security/conduct, service coordination, surgery/procedure, line/tube, fall, medication/IV safety, employee general incident, environment/equipment, adverse drug reaction, skin/tissue and diagnosis/treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 1918 incident reports occurred in the study period and 843,902 CT examinations were performed. The rate of safety incident was 0.22 % (1918/843,902). The highest incident rates were due to adverse drug reactions (652/843,902 = 0.077 %) followed by medication/IV safety (573/843,902 = 0.068 %) and diagnostic test orders (206/843,902 = 0.024 %). Overall 45 % of incidents (869/1918) caused no harm and did not affect the patient, 33 % (637/1918) caused no harm but affected the patient, 22 % (420/1918) caused temporary or minor harm/damage and less than 1 % (10/1918) caused permanent or major harm/damage or death.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows a total safety incident report rate of 0.22 % in CT. The most common incidents are adverse drug reaction, medication/IV safety and diagnostic test orders.

KEY POINTS

• Total safety incident report rate in CT is 0.22 %. • Adverse drug reaction is the most common safety incident in CT. • Medication/IV safety is the second most common safety incident in CT.