Frequency of metabolic syndrome and 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 levels in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Br J Gen Pract. 2013;104:447-453. [PMID: 24008607 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp13x670660]

Exploring the association of adverse drug reactions with medication adherence and quality of life among hypertensive patients: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Effective hypertension management requires medication adherence to prevent complications. However, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) can undermine adherence and negatively affect patients' quality of life. Limited research has explored the association between ADRs, medication adherence, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in individuals with hypertension.

AIM

To investigate the association between ADRs, medication adherence, and HRQoL among patients with hypertension.

METHOD

A cross-sectional study using telephone interviews and medical record reviews was conducted in 11 primary care facilities in Indonesia. The causality of reported ADRs was assessed using the Naranjo algorithm, validated by a panel of experts in pharmacy practice and medication safety. The severity of ADRs was classified using the Hartwig scale. Adherence to antihypertensive drugs was estimated using the Medication Adherence Report Scale-5 (MARS-5). The EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L was used to measure HRQoL. The association between ADRs and medication adherence was assessed using multivariate logistic regression, while the association with HRQoL was evaluated through the Tobit regression model.

RESULTS

A total of 507 patients were included in this study. We found that 20.32% (n = 103) of the patients experienced ADRs, with the most commonly reported ADRs being polyuria and urgency, gastrointestinal symptoms, leg swelling, dizziness/hypotension, palpitations, and dry cough. The majority experienced mild ADRs (n = 75, 72.82%), while 27.18% (n = 28) had reactions of moderate severity. Experiencing ADRs was associated with reduced medication adherence (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 7.15, 95% CI 4.07-12.55) and decreased HRQoL (coefficient: - 0.037).

CONCLUSION

Patients experiencing ADRs were seven times more likely to be non-adherent to their medication regimen and reported a reduced quality of life compared to those without ADRs, placing them at a higher risk of suboptimal treatment outcomes. This finding highlights the need for additional monitoring and education for patients affected by ADRs, particularly through more frequent clinical and laboratory assessments, timely management of ADRs, and personalized education on the importance of adherence to prevent hypertension-related complications.

Prevalence of cardiovascular drug-related adverse drug reactions consultations in UK primary care: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) represent a significant barrier to achieve optimal treatment outcomes. Cardiovascular drugs, including antihypertensive drugs, lipid-lowering drugs, and antithrombotic drugs, are among the most prescribed medications in the primary care setting.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the prevalence of cardiovascular drug-related ADRs consultations in United Kingdom (UK) primary care and identify risk factors of these ADRs.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study of cardiovascular drug users between 2000-2019 using UK IQVIA Medical Research Data. ADRs consultations were identified using database screening method employing standardised designated codes. The overall and annual age-standardised prevalence was estimated using direct standardisation method using 2019 mid-year UK population. Risk factors of ADRs consultations were estimated using logistic regression model stratified by therapeutic areas.

RESULTS

The standardised prevalence of consultations related to cardiovascular drugs ADRs was 10.60 (95% CI. 10.46, 10.75) per 1000 patients. Patients aged 70-79 years had the highest occurrence of ADRs consultations. The most frequently drug classes implicated in the ADRs consultations were statins (n = 9,993 events, 27.09%), beta-blockers (n = 8,538 events, 23.15%), ACEIs/ARBs (n = 8,345 events, 22.62%), and aspirin (n = 6,482 events, 17.57%). Risk factors of ADRs consultations were previous history of cardiovascular diseases, e.g., myocardial infarction and stroke; advanced age, comorbidities; diabetes and dyslipidaemia; and polypharmacy.

CONCLUSIONS

The burden of cardiovascular drug-related ADRs consultations in primary care was considerable. Statins, beta-blockers, ACEIs/ARBs, and aspirin were the most frequently implicated drug classes. Closer clinical monitoring should be performed for patients affected by the ADRs to mitigate the risk of suboptimal treatment outcomes.

The Safety of Outpatient Health Care : Review of Electronic Health Records

BACKGROUND

Despite considerable emphasis on delivering safe care, substantial patient harm occurs. Although most care occurs in the outpatient setting, knowledge of outpatient adverse events (AEs) remains limited.

OBJECTIVE

To measure AEs in the outpatient setting.

DESIGN

Retrospective review of the electronic health record (EHR).

SETTING

11 outpatient sites in Massachusetts in 2018.

PATIENTS

3103 patients who received outpatient care.

MEASUREMENTS

Using a trigger method, nurse reviewers identified possible AEs and physicians adjudicated them, ranked severity, and assessed preventability. Generalized estimating equations were used to assess the association of having at least 1 AE with age, sex, race, and primary insurance. Variation in AE rates was analyzed across sites.

RESULTS

The 3103 patients (mean age, 52 years) were more often female (59.8%), White (75.1%), English speakers (90.8%), and privately insured (70.4%) and had a mean of 4 outpatient encounters in 2018. Overall, 7.0% (95% CI, 4.6% to 9.3%) of patients had at least 1 AE (8.6 events per 100 patients annually). Adverse drug events were the most common AE (63.8%), followed by health care-associated infections (14.8%) and surgical or procedural events (14.2%). Severity was serious in 17.4% of AEs, life-threatening in 2.1%, and never fatal. Overall, 23.2% of AEs were preventable. Having at least 1 AE was less often associated with ages 18 to 44 years than with ages 65 to 84 years (standardized risk difference, -0.05 [CI, -0.09 to -0.02]) and more often associated with Black race than with Asian race (standardized risk difference, 0.09 [CI, 0.01 to 0.17]). Across study sites, 1.8% to 23.6% of patients had at least 1 AE and clinical category of AEs varied substantially.

LIMITATION

Retrospective EHR review may miss AEs.

CONCLUSION

Outpatient harm was relatively common and often serious. Adverse drug events were most frequent. Rates were higher among older adults. Interventions to curtail outpatient harm are urgently needed.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Controlled Risk Insurance Company and the Risk Management Foundation of the Harvard Medical Institutions.

Impact of ACEIs and ARBs-related adverse drug reaction on patients' clinical outcomes: a cohort study in UK primary care

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reaction (ADR) related to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) may negatively affect patients' treatment outcomes.

AIM

To investigate the impact of ACEIs/ARBs-related ADR consultation on cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and all-cause mortality.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Propensity score-matched cohort study of ACEIs/ARBs between 2004 and 2019 using UK IQVIA medical research data.

METHOD

ADR consultations were identified using standardised designated codes. Propensity scores were calculated based on comorbidities, concomitant medications, frailty, and polypharmacy. Cox's proportional hazard regression model was used to compare the outcomes between patients in ADR and non-ADR groups. In the secondary analysis, treatment- pattern changes following the ADR were examined and the subsequent outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Among 1 471 906 eligible users of ACEIs/ARBs, 13 652 (0.93%) patients had ACEIs/ARBs- related ADR consultation in primary care. Patients with ACEIs/ARBs-related ADR consultation had an increased risk of subsequent CVD events and all- cause mortality in both primary prevention (CVD events: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05 to 1.43; all-cause mortality: aHR 1.14, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.27) and secondary prevention cohorts (CVD events: aHR 1.13, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.21; all-cause mortality: aHR 1.15, 95% CI = 1.09 to 1.21). Half (50.19%) of patients with ADR continued to use ACEIs/ARBs, and these patients had a reduced risk of mortality (aHR 0.88, 95% CI = 0.82 to 0.95) compared with those who discontinued using ACEIs/ARBs.

CONCLUSION

This study provides information on the burden of ADR on patients and the health system. The findings call for additional monitoring and treatment strategies for patients affected by ADR to mitigate the risks of adverse clinical outcomes.

Statin-related adverse drug reactions in UK primary care consultations: A retrospective cohort study to evaluate the risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality

AIMS

To investigate the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and all-cause mortality in patients with statin-related adverse drug reaction (ADR) consultation in primary care and examine whether different treatments following the ADR affect subsequent outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of statin users between 2004 and 2019 using IQVIA Medical Research Data (formally known as the THIN database). Patients with statin-related ADR consultation were matched by propensity score (1:1) to statin users without ADR consultation based on demographics, comorbidities and concomitant medication. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to compare the risk of subsequent CVD event and all-cause mortality, stratified by history of CVD. In the secondary analysis among patients with statin-related ADR, treatment changes within a 1-year period following the ADR were examined and the outcomes were compared between different treatment groups.

RESULTS

Among 1 564 687 statin users, 19 035 (1.22%) had a statin-related ADR consultation in primary care. The mean (standard deviation) follow-up time was 6.32 (3.74) years and 5.31 (3.83) years for CVD primary and secondary prevention cohorts, respectively. Statin-related ADR consultation was associated with subsequent CVD events in both cohorts (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] of 1.39 [95% CI 1.23, 1.57] and 1.34 [95% CI 1.25,1.42], respectively). In the secondary analysis among patients with statin-related ADR consultation, we found that (i) continued statin prescription or combination of any statin with additional lipid-lowering treatment (LLT) and (ii) other LLT only were associated with lower risks of CVD event (adjusted HR 0.71 [95% CI 0.64, 0.78] and 0.75 [95% CI 0.62, 0.92], respectively) and all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 0.46 [95% CI 0.42, 0.50] and 0.52 [95% CI, 0.43, 0.64], respectively), compared to discontinuation of all LLT.

CONCLUSION

Statin-related ADR was associated with an increased risk of subsequent CVD event, indicating that these patients should be monitored more closely. Continued lipid-lowering medication is of importance to protect against CVD events and mortality.

Analysis of Patient Safety Incidents in Primary Care Reported in an Electronic Registry Application

OBJECTIVES

(1) To describe the epidemiology of patient safety (PS) incidents registered in an electronic notification system in primary care (PC) health centres; (2) to define a risk map; and (3) to identify the critical areas where intervention is needed.

DESIGN

Descriptive analytical study of incidents reported from 1 January to 31 December 2018, on the TPSC Cloud™ platform (The Patient Safety Company) accessible from the corporate website (Intranet) of the regional public health service.

SETTING

24 Catalan Institute of Health PC health centres of the Tarragona region (Spain).

PARTICIPANTS

Professionals from the PC health centres and a Patient Safety Functional Unit.

MEASUREMENTS

Data obtained from records voluntarily submitted to an electronic, standardised and anonymised form. Data recorded: healthcare unit, notifier, type of incident, risk matrix, causal and contributing factors, preventability, level of resolution and improvement actions.

RESULTS

A total of 1544 reports were reviewed and 1129 PS incidents were analysed: 25.0% of incidents did not reach the patient; 66.5% reached the patient without causing harm, and 8.5% caused adverse events. Nurses provided half of the reports (48.5%), while doctors reported more adverse events (70.8%; p < 0.01). Of the 96 adverse events, 46.9% only required observation, 34.4% caused temporary damage that required treatment, 13.5% required (or prolonged) hospitalization, and 5.2% caused severe permanent damage and/or a situation close to death. Notably, 99.2% were considered preventable. The main critical areas were: communication (27.8%), clinical-administrative management (25.1%), care delivery (23.5%) and medicines (18.4%); few incidents were related to diagnosis (3.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

PS incident notification applications are adequate for reporting incidents and adverse events associated with healthcare. Approximately 75% and 10% of incidents reach the patient and cause some damage, respectively, and most cases are considered preventable. Adequate and strengthened risk management of critical areas is required to improve PS.

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.

Nature and type of patient-reported safety incidents in primary care: cross-sectional survey of patients from Australia and England

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement in safety has shown positive effects in preventing or reducing adverse events and potential safety risks. Capturing and utilising patient-reported safety incident data can be used for service learning and improvement.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to characterise the nature of patient-reported safety incidents in primary care.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of two cross sectional studies.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients from Australian and English primary care settings.

MEASURES

Patients' self-reported experiences of safety incidents were captured using the validated Primary Care Patient Measure of Safety questionnaire. Qualitative responses to survey items were analysed and categorised using the Primary Care Patient Safety Classification System. The frequency and type of safety incidents, contributory factors, and patient and system level outcomes are presented.

RESULTS

A total of 1329 patients (n=490, England; n=839, Australia) completed the questionnaire. Overall, 5.3% (n=69) of patients reported a safety incident over the preceding 12 months. The most common incident types were administration incidents (n=27, 31%) (mainly delays in accessing a physician) and incidents involving diagnosis and assessment (n=16, 18.4%). Organisation of care accounted for 27.6% (n=29) of the contributory factors identified in the safety incidents. Staff factors (n=13, 12.4%) was the second most commonly reported contributory factor. Where an outcome could be determined, patient inconvenience (n=24, 28.6%) and clinical harm (n=21, 25%) (psychological distress and unpleasant experience) were the most frequent.

CONCLUSIONS

The nature and outcomes of patient-reported incidents differ markedly from those identified in studies of staff-reported incidents. The findings from this study emphasise the importance of capturing patient-reported safety incidents in the primary care setting. The patient perspective can complement existing sources of safety intelligence with the potential for service improvement.

Patient Safety Culture in Mutual Insurance Companies in Spain

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to assess the safety culture in a mutual insurance sector, searching for improvement opportunities. This sector offers health insurance for work-related injuries and occupational illnesses and represents an annual volume of patients corresponding to approximately 10% of the working population in Europe.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted to assess the safety culture in the mutual insurance sector in Spain. All physicians, nurses, and physiotherapists (N = 816) working in the organization in hospitals, outpatient clinics, and managerial settings were invited to reply to an online survey.

RESULTS

A total of 499 professionals completed the questionnaire (response rate, 61%). Two dimensions were assessed: attitudinal (5 items) and instrumental (5 items). There were no differences between professional profiles or centers in the attitudinal (7.8; standard deviation, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 7.6-7.9) or instrumental (8.5; standard deviation, 1.0; 95% confidence interval, 8.5-8.6) factors. The lowest level of implementation (<9 points) was related to the following: open disclosure after an adverse event (73%), having a quality and safety plan (75%), prioritizing the improvement of patient care (75%), and involving patients when making decisions on potential treatments (63%). Managers showed lower scores than the rest of professionals' groups (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This intent is to introduce a patient safety culture assessment in the mutual insurance companies. These results may encourage the implementation of quality and safety plans in this sector by paying more attention to attitudinal aspects.

[Avoidable adverse events in primary care. Retrospective cohort study to determine their frequency and severity]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency of avoidable adverse events (AAEs) in Primary Care (PC).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

LOCATION

Family medicine and paediatric clinics in Andalusia, Aragon, Castilla-La Mancha, Catalonia, Madrid, Navarre, and Valencia.

PARTICIPANTS

A review was performed on a designated sample of 2,397 medical records (95% confidence level and 2% accuracy). The sample was stratified by age group as regards the frequency of physician consultations and considering equal distribution of male and female patients.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS

Number and severity of identified AAEs from February 2018 to September 2019.

RESULTS

A total of 2,557 medical records were reviewed (1,928, 75.4% of adult patients, and 629, 24.6% paediatrics). A total of 182 (7.1%, 95% CI 6.1-8.1%) AAEs that affected 168 patients were identified, which included 7.6% (95% CI 6.4-8.8%) in adults and 5.7% (95% CI 3.9-7.5%) in paediatric patients. The number of AAEs in women was higher than in men (P = 0.006). The incidence of AAEs in boys and girls was similar (P = 0.3). Permanent damage was caused by AAEs in 6 (4.1%) adult patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Seeking formulas to increase patient safety in PC should remain a priority objective, particularly in female patients and in paediatrics. One in 24 AAEs causes serious and permanent damage in adults.

Incidence, nature and causes of avoidable significant harm in primary care in England: retrospective case note review

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the incidence of avoidable significant harm in primary care in England; describe and classify the associated patient safety incidents and generate suggestions to mitigate risks of ameliorable factors contributing to the incidents.

DESIGN

Retrospective case note review. Patients with significant health problems were identified and clinical judgements were made on avoidability and severity of harm. Factors contributing to avoidable harm were identified and recorded.

SETTING

Primary care.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirteen general practitioners (GPs) undertook a retrospective case note review of a sample of 14 407 primary care patients registered with 12 randomly selected general practices from three regions in England (total list size: 92 255 patients).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The incidence of significant harm considered at least 'probably avoidable' and the nature of the safety incidents.

RESULTS

The rate of significant harm considered at least probably avoidable was 35.6 (95% CI 23.3 to 48.0) per 100 000 patient-years (57.9, 95% CI 42.2 to 73.7, per 100 000 based on a sensitivity analysis). Overall, 74 cases of avoidable harm were detected, involving 72 patients. Three types of incident accounted for more than 90% of the problems: problems with diagnosis accounted for 45/74 (60.8%) primary incidents, followed by medication-related problems (n=19, 25.7%) and delayed referrals (n=8, 10.8%). In 59 (79.7%) cases, the significant harm could have been identified sooner (n=48) or prevented (n=11) if the GP had taken actions aligned with evidence-based guidelines.

CONCLUSION

There is likely to be a substantial burden of avoidable significant harm attributable to primary care in England with diagnostic error accounting for most harms. Based on the contributory factors we found, improvements could be made through more effective implementation of existing information technology, enhanced team coordination and communication, and greater personal and informational continuity of care.

Is vitamin D receptor a druggable target for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis?

Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is a progressed stage of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, and available therapeutic strategies for NASH are limited. Vitamin D receptor (VDR) is proposed as a druggable target for NASH due to the discovery of vitamin D deficiency in NASH patients. To date, vitamin D supplementation has not consistently conferred expected therapeutic benefits, raising the question of whether VDR can serve as a proper drug target for NASH. It is known that VDR can interact with other ligands such as bile acids in addition to vitamin D, and its expression can be induced by fatty acids, and insulin. It has also been shown that while activation of VDR in hepatic macrophages and hepatic stellate cells resulted in attenuation of hepatic inflammation and fibrosis, activation of VDR in hepatocytes could accelerate lipid accumulation. Thus, the multiplicity of VDR ligands, together with the cell type-specificity of VDR activation, must be taken into consideration in assessing the validity of VDR being a potential druggable target for NASH treatment. To this end, we have evaluated the relationship between VDR activation and various contributing factors, such as gut microbiota, bile acid, fatty acids, and insulin, in addition to vitamin D, with an expectation that a potential drug might be identified that can elicit VDR activation in a tissue- and/or cell type-specific manner and therefore achieving therapeutic benefits in NASH.

Medication safety challenges in primary care: Nurses' perspective

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To identify the issues surrounding medication error reporting in community nursing and improvement strategies related to medication safety.

BACKGROUND

Medication-related problems have been identified from various sources in the literature. Examples of these include incident reporting by healthcare professionals, medico-legal and patient complaints and systematic identification of organisational structure. Only a few studies report on the clinicians' perceptions of medication safety in community nursing and the challenges they face within their workplace to implement medication safety initiatives.

DESIGN

Qualitative design, using conversation-style interviews with experienced registered nurses in primary care roles.

METHODS

Using a general iterative approach of semantic analysis, our qualitative research study was guided by an essentialist paradigm. Our method for understanding included semi-structured in-depth interviews with 10 clinicians from a large community care organisation in rural Victoria in Australia. We developed an interview guide, which included open-ended questions on clinicians' experiences, perceived barriers and facilitators, and strategies to improve medication safety.

RESULTS

Several barriers have been identified by healthcare practitioners that hinder medication safety in primary care including culture differences between community and hospital setting, politics within the healthcare system, lack of clarity around the nurses' roles and lack of error reporting. Other sources of errors cited by the participants were the lack of clarity or awareness of the processes and procedures of medication incidents reporting for staff within the organisation experience. Lack of education regarding medication safety, the dilemmas associated with reporting and documentation are also significant barriers.

Adverse events recording in electronic health record systems in primary care

Background

Adequate record keeping of medication adverse events in electronic health records systems is important for patient safety. Events that remain unrecorded cannot be communicated from one health professional to another. In the absence of a gold standard, we investigate the variation between Dutch general practices in the extent to which they record medication adverse events.

Methods

Data were derived from electronic health records (EHR) of Dutch general practices participating in NIVEL Primary Care Database (NIVEL-PCD) in 2014, including 308 general practices with a total practice population of 1,256,049 listed patients. Medication adverse events were defined as recorded ICPC-code A85 (adverse effect medical agent). Between practice variation was studied using multilevel logistic regression analysis corrected for age, gender, number of different medicines prescriptions and number of chronic diseases.

Results

In 2014 there were 8330 patients with at least one medication adverse event recorded. This corresponds to 6.9 medication adverse events per 1000 patients and is higher for women, elderly, patients with polypharmacy and for patients with comorbidity. Corrected for these patient characteristics the median odds ratio (MOR = 1.92) suggests an almost twofold difference between general practices in recorded medication adverse events.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that improvement in terms of uniformity in recording medication adverse events is possible, preventing potential damage for patients. We suggest that creating a learning health system by individual practice feedback on the number of recordings of adverse events would help practitioners to improve their recording habits.

Donaldson L, Carson-Stevens A. Sources of unsafe primary care for older adults: a mixed-methods analysis of patient safety incident reports

Background

older adults are frequent users of primary healthcare services, but are at increased risk of healthcare-related harm in this setting.

Objectives

to describe the factors associated with actual or potential harm to patients aged 65 years and older, treated in primary care, to identify action to produce safer care.

Design and Setting

a cross-sectional mixed-methods analysis of a national (England and Wales) database of patient safety incident reports from 2005 to 2013.

Subjects

1,591 primary care patient safety incident reports regarding patients aged 65 years and older.

Methods

we developed a classification system for the analysis of patient safety incident reports to describe: the incident and preceding chain of incidents; other contributory factors; and patient harm outcome. We combined findings from exploratory descriptive and thematic analyses to identify key sources of unsafe care.

Results

the main sources of unsafe care in our weighted sample were due to: medication-related incidents e.g. prescribing, dispensing and administering (n = 486, 31%; 15% serious patient harm); communication-related incidents e.g. incomplete or non-transfer of information across care boundaries (n = 390, 25%; 12% serious patient harm); and clinical decision-making incidents which led to the most serious patient harm outcomes (n = 203, 13%; 41% serious patient harm).

Conclusion

priority areas for further research to determine the burden and preventability of unsafe primary care for older adults, include: the timely electronic tools for prescribing, dispensing and administering medication in the community; electronic transfer of information between healthcare settings; and, better clinical decision-making support and guidance.

Linked Hospital and Primary Care Database Analysis of the Incidence and Impact of Psychiatric Morbidity Following Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery in England

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate risk of psychiatric morbidity and its impact on survival in gastrointestinal surgery.

BACKGROUND

Psychiatric morbidity related to surgery is poorly understood, and may be evaluated using linked hospital and primary care data.

METHODS

Patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery from 2000 to 2011 with linkage of Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES), Office of National Statistics (ONS), and National Cancer Intelligence Network (NCIN) databases were studied. Psychiatric morbidity was defined as a diagnosis code in CPRD or HES, or a prescription code for psychiatric medication in the 36 months before (preoperative) or 12 months after (postoperative) surgery. Newly diagnosed psychiatric morbidity was measured in patients without preoperative psychiatric morbidity.

RESULTS

In our study, 14,797 (23.8%) and 47,279 (76.2%) patients had surgery for cancer and benign disease, respectively. Postoperative psychiatric morbidity was observed in 10.1% (1500/14797) of patients undergoing cancer surgery. Logistic regression revealed that when adjusted for other factors, cancer diagnosis [odds ratio (OR) = 1.19] independently predicted postoperative psychiatric morbidity (P < 0.05). Hepatopancreaticobiliary resection (OR = 2.40) and esophagogastrectomy (OR = 2.55) carried the highest risks of postoperative psychiatric morbidity (P < 0.05). Preoperative psychiatric morbidity (OR = 1.16) and newly diagnosed psychiatric morbidity (OR = 1.87) were associated with increased 1-year mortality in cancer patients only (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative psychiatric morbidity affected a tenth of patients who underwent gastrointestinal cancer surgery and was associated with increased mortality. Strategies to identify patients at risk preoperatively and to reduce the observed adverse impact of postoperative psychiatric morbidity should be part of perioperative care in complex cancer patients.

The Second Victim Phenomenon After a Clinical Error: The Design and Evaluation of a Website to Reduce Caregivers' Emotional Responses After a Clinical Error

Background

Adverse events (incidents that harm a patient) can also produce emotional hardship for the professionals involved (second victims). Although a few international pioneering programs exist that aim to facilitate the recovery of the second victim, there are no known initiatives that aim to raise awareness in the professional community about this issue and prevent the situation from worsening.

Objective

The aim of this study was to design and evaluate an online program directed at frontline hospital and primary care health professionals that raises awareness and provides information about the second victim phenomenon.

Methods

The design of the Mitigating Impact in Second Victims (MISE) online program was based on a literature review, and its contents were selected by a group of 15 experts on patient safety with experience in both clinical and academic settings. The website hosting MISE was subjected to an accreditation process by an external quality agency that specializes in evaluating health websites. The MISE structure and content were evaluated by 26 patient safety managers at hospitals and within primary care in addition to 266 frontline health care professionals who followed the program, taking into account its comprehension, usefulness of the information, and general adequacy. Finally, the amount of knowledge gained from the program was assessed with three objective measures (pre- and posttest design).

Results

The website earned Advanced Accreditation for health websites after fulfilling required standards. The comprehension and practical value of the MISE content were positively assessed by 88% (23/26) and 92% (24/26) of patient safety managers, respectively. MISE was positively evaluated by health care professionals, who awarded it 8.8 points out of a maximum 10. Users who finished MISE improved their knowledge on patient safety terminology, prevalence and impact of adverse events and clinical errors, second victim support models, and recommended actions following a severe adverse event (P<.001).

Conclusions

The MISE program differs from existing intervention initiatives by its preventive nature in relation to the second victim phenomenon. Its online nature makes it an easily accessible tool for the professional community. This program has shown to increase user’s knowledge on this issue and it helps them correct their approach. Furthermore, it is one of the first initiatives to attempt to bring the second victim phenomenon closer to primary care.

Patient safety incidents are common in primary care: A national prospective active incident reporting survey

BACKGROUND

The study objectives were to describe the incidence and the nature of patient safety incidents (PSIs) in primary care general practice settings, and to explore the association between these incidents and practice or organizational characteristics.

METHODS

GPs, randomly selected from a national influenza surveillance network (n = 800) across France, prospectively reported any incidents observed each day over a one-week period between May and July 2013. An incident was an event or circumstance that could have resulted, or did result, in harm to a patient, which the GP would not wish to recur. Primary outcome was the incidence of PSIs which was determined by counting reports per total number of patient encounters. Reports were categorized using existing taxonomies. The association with practice and organizational characteristics was calculated using a negative binomial regression model.

RESULTS

127 GPs (participation rate 79%) reported 317 incidents of which 270 were deemed to be a posteriori judged preventable, among 12,348 encounters. 77% had no consequences for the patient. The incidence of reported PSIs was 26 per 1000 patient encounters per week (95% CI [23‰ -28‰]). Incidents were three times more frequently related to the organization of healthcare than to knowledge and skills of health professionals, and especially to the workflow in the GPs' offices and to the communication between providers and with patients. Among GP characteristics, three were related with an increased incidence in the final multivariable model: length of consultation higher than 15 minutes, method of receiving radiological results (by fax compared to paper or email), and being in a multidisciplinary clinic compared with sole practitioners.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient safety incidents (PSIs) occurred in mean once every two days in the sampled GPs and 2% of them were associated with a definite possibility for harm. Studying the association between organizational features of general practices and PSIs remains a major challenge and one of the most important issues for safety in primary care.

Linked hospital and primary care database analysis of the impact of short-term complications on recurrence in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair

OBJECTIVE

To study the effects of short-term complications on recurrence following laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair using routine data.

BACKGROUND

Linked primary and secondary care databases can evaluate the quality of inguinal hernia surgery by quantifying short- and long-term outcome together.

METHODS

Longitudinal analysis of linked primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) and hospital administrative (Hospital Episodes Statistics) databases quantified 30-day complications (wound infection and bleeding) and surgery for recurrence after primary repair performed between 1st April 1997 and 31st March 2012.

RESULTS

Out of 41,545 primary inguinal hernia repairs, 10.3% (4296/41,545) were laparoscopic. Complications were less frequent following laparoscopic (1.8%, 78/4296) compared with open (3.5%, 1288/37,249) inguinal hernia repair (p < 0.05). Recurrence was more frequent following laparoscopic (3.5%, 84/2541) compared with open (1.2%, 366/31,859) repair (p < 0.05). Time to recurrence was shorter for laparoscopic (26.4 months SD 28.5) compared with open (46.7 months SD 37.6) repair (p < 0.05). Overall, complications were associated with recurrence (3.2%, 44/1366 with complications; 1.7%, 700/40,179 without complications; p < 0.05). Complications did not significantly increase the risk of recurrence in open hernia repair (OR = 1.49; 95% CI 0.97-2.30, p = 0.069). Complications following laparoscopic repair was significantly associated with increased risk of recurrence (OR = 7.86; 95% CI 3.46-17.85, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Complications recorded in linked routine data predicted recurrence following laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Focus must, therefore, be placed on achieving good short-term outcome, which is likely to translate to better longer term results using the laparoscopic approach.

Design and Testing of the Safety Agenda Mobile App for Managing Health Care Managers' Patient Safety Responsibilities

Background

Adverse events are a reality in clinical practice. Reducing the prevalence of preventable adverse events by stemming their causes requires health managers’ engagement.

Objective

The objective of our study was to develop an app for mobile phones and tablets that would provide managers with an overview of their responsibilities in matters of patient safety and would help them manage interventions that are expected to be carried out throughout the year.

Methods

The Safety Agenda Mobile App (SAMA) was designed based on standardized regulations and reviews of studies about health managers’ roles in patient safety. A total of 7 managers used a beta version of SAMA for 2 months and then they assessed and proposed improvements in its design. Their experience permitted redesigning SAMA, improving functions and navigation. A total of 74 Spanish health managers tried out the revised version of SAMA. After 4 months, their assessment was requested in a voluntary and anonymous manner.

Results

SAMA is an iOS app that includes 37 predefined tasks that are the responsibility of health managers. Health managers can adapt these tasks to their schedule, add new ones, and share them with their team. SAMA menus are structured in 4 main areas: information, registry, task list, and settings. Of the 74 users who tested SAMA, 64 (86%) users provided a positive assessment of SAMA characteristics and utility. Over an 11-month period, 238 users downloaded SAMA. This mobile app has obtained the AppSaludable (HealthyApp) Quality Seal.

Conclusions

SAMA includes a set of activities that are expected to be carried out by health managers in matters of patient safety and contributes toward improving the awareness of their responsibilities in matters of safety.

The psychological impact of symptoms related to esophagogastric cancer resection presenting in primary care: A national linked database study

BACKGROUND

The objective was to evaluate incidence, risk factors and impact of postoperative symptoms following esophagogastric cancer resection in primary care.

METHODS

Patients undergoing esophagogastrectomy for cancer from 1998 to 2010 with linked records in Clinical Practice Research Datalink, Hospital Episodes Statistics and Office of National Statistics databases were studied. The recording of codes for reflux, dysphagia, dyspepsia, nausea, vomiting, dumping, diarrhea, steatorrhea, appetite loss, weight loss, pain and fatigue were identified up to 12 months postoperatively. Psychiatric morbidity was also examined and its risk evaluated by logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 58.6% (1029/1755) of patients were alive 2 years after surgery. Of these, 41.1% had recorded postoperative symptoms. Reflux, dysphagia, dyspepsia and pain were more frequent following esophagectomy compared with gastrectomy (p < 0.05). Complications (OR = 1.40 95%CI 1.00-1.95) and surgical procedure predicted postoperative symptoms (p < 0.05). When compared with partial gastrectomy, esophagectomy (OR = 2.03 95%CI 1.26-3.27), total gastrectomy (OR = 2.44 95%CI 1.57-3.79) and esophagogastrectomy (OR = 2.66 95%CI 1.85-2.86) were associated with postoperative symptoms (p < 0.05). The majority of patients with postoperative psychiatric morbidity had depression or anxiety (98%). Predictors of postoperative depression/anxiety included younger age (OR = 0.97 95%CI 0.96-0.99), complications (OR = 2.40 95%CI 1.51-3.83), psychiatric history (OR = 6.73 95%CI 4.25-10.64) and postoperative symptoms (OR = 1.78 95%CI 1.17-2.71).

CONCLUSIONS

Over 40% of patients had symptoms related to esophagogastric cancer resection recorded in primary care, and were associated with an increase in postoperative depression and anxiety.

[The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statement]

Zunehmend werden routinemäßig gesammelte Gesundheitsdaten, die zu administrativen und klinischen Zwecken und ohne spezifische, a priori festgelegte Forschungsziele erhoben wurden, auch für die Forschung eingesetzt. Die rasche Entwicklung und Verfügbarkeit dieser Daten machten Probleme deutlich, die in den bestehenden Berichts-Leitlinien, wie dem STROBE-Statement (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) nicht behandelt werden. Das RECORD-Statement (REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data) wurde entwickelt, um diese Lücken zu schließen. RECORD ist als Erweiterung des STROBE-Statements gedacht, um Punkte abzudecken, die spezifisch sind beim Berichten von Beobachtungsstudien, die routinemäßig gesammelte Gesundheitsdaten verwenden. RECORD besteht aus einer Checkliste von 13 Punkten mit Bezug zu Titel, Abstract, Einleitung, Methoden-, Ergebnis- und Diskussionsteil von Artikeln sowie zu anderen Informationen, die in Forschungsberichten dieser Art enthalten sein sollten. Dieses Dokument enthält die Checkliste sowie Erläuterungen und weitere Erklärungen, um die Verwendung der Checkliste zu verbessern. Beispiele für ein gutes Berichten der einzelnen Punkte der RECORD-Checkliste sind ebenfalls in diesem Dokument enthalten. Dieses Dokument sowie die zugehörige Website und ein Forum (http://www.record-statement.org) werden die Umsetzung und das Verständnis von RECORD verbessern. Autoren, Redakteure von Fachzeitschriften und Peer-Reviewer können die Transparenz beim Berichten von Forschungsergebnissen erhöhen, indem sie RECORD anwenden.

How to monitor patient safety in primary care? Healthcare professionals' views

Objective

To identify patient safety monitoring strategies in primary care.

Design

Open-ended questionnaire survey.

Participants

A total of 113 healthcare professionals returned the survey from a group of 500 who were invited to participate achieving a response rate of 22.6%.

Setting

North-West London, United Kingdom.

Method

A paper-based and equivalent online survey was developed and subjected to multiple stages of piloting. Respondents were asked to suggest strategies for monitoring patient safety in primary care. These monitoring suggestions were then subjected to a content frequency analysis which was conducted by two researchers.

Main Outcome measures

Respondent-derived monitoring strategies.

Results

In total, respondents offered 188 suggestions for monitoring patient safety in primary care. The content analysis revealed that these could be condensed into 24 different future monitoring strategies with varying levels of support. Most commonly, respondents supported the suggestion that patient safety can only be monitored effectively in primary care with greater levels of staffing or with additional resources.

Conclusion

Approximately one-third of all responses were recommendations for strategies which addressed monitoring of the individual in the clinical practice environment (e.g. GP, practice nurse) to improve safety. There was a clear need for more staff and resource set aside to allow and encourage safety monitoring. Respondents recommended the dissemination of specific information for monitoring patient safety such as distributing the lessons of significant event audits amongst GP practices to enable shared learning.

Risk of Post-Discharge Venous Thromboembolism and Associated Mortality in General Surgery: A Population-Based Cohort Study Using Linked Hospital and Primary Care Data in England

BACKGROUND

Trends towards day case surgery and enhanced recovery mean that postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) may increasingly arise after hospital discharge. However, hospital data alone are unable to capture adverse events that occur outside of the hospital setting. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has suggested the use of primary care data to quantify hospital care-related VTE. Data in surgical patients using these resources is lacking. The aim of this study was to measure VTE risk and associated mortality in general surgery using linked primary care and hospital databases, to improve our understanding of harm from VTE that arises beyond hospital stay.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal cohort study using nationally linked primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink, CPRD), hospital administrative (Hospital Episodes Statistics, HES), population statistics (Office of National Statistics, ONS) and National Cancer Intelligence Network databases. Routinely collected information was used to quantify 90-day in-hospital VTE, 90-day post-discharge VTE and 90-day mortality in adults undergoing one of twelve general surgical procedures between 1st April 1997 and 31st March 2012. The earliest postoperative recording of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism in CPRD, HES and ONS was counted in each patient. Covariates from multiple datasets were combined to derive detailed prediction models for VTE and mortality. Limitation included the capture of VTE presenting to healthcare only and the lack of information on adherence to pharmacological thromboprophylaxis as there was no data linkage to hospital pharmacy records.

RESULTS

There were 981 VTE events captured within 90 days of surgery in 168005 procedures (23.7/1000 patient-years). Overall, primary care data increased the detection of postoperative VTE by a factor of 1.38 (981/710) when compared with using HES and ONS only. Total VTE rates ranged between 3.2/1000 patient-years in haemorrhoidectomy to 118.3/1000 patient-years in esophagogastric resection. Predictors of VTE included emergency surgery (OR = 1.91 95%CI 1.60-2.28, p<0.001), age (OR = 1.02 95%CI 1.02-1.03, p<0.001), body mass index (OR = 1.03 95%CI 1.01-1.04, p<0.001), previous VTE (OR = 8.07 95%CI 6.61-9.83, p<0.001), length of stay (OR = 1.00 95%CI 1.00-1.00, p = 0.007) and cancer stages II (OR = 1.38 95%CI 1.03-1.87, p = 0.033), III (OR = 1.50 95%CI 1.11-2.01, p = 0.008) and IV (OR = 1.63 95%CI 1.03-2.59, p = 0.038). Major organ resections had the greatest odds of VTE when adjusted for other risk factors including length of hospital stay. Post-discharge VTE accounted for 64.8% (636/981) of all recorded VTE. In-hospital VTE (165.4/1000 patient-years) was recorded more frequently than post-discharge VTE (16.2/1000 patient-years). Both in-hospital (OR = 2.07 95%CI 1.51-2.85, p<0.001) and post-discharge (OR = 4.03 95%CI 2.95-5.51, p<0.001) VTE independently predicted 90-day mortality. In patients who died and VTE was recorded on HES or CPRD (n = 56), VTE was one of the causes of death in 37.5% (21/56) of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

A large proportion of postoperative VTE was detected in primary care. Evaluation of linked databases was a useful way of measuring postoperative VTE at population level. These resources identified a significant association between post-discharge VTE and mortality in general surgery.

The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statement

Routinely collected health data, obtained for administrative and clinical purposes without specific a priori research goals, are increasingly used for research. The rapid evolution and availability of these data have revealed issues not addressed by existing reporting guidelines, such as Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE). The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely collected health Data (RECORD) statement was created to fill these gaps. RECORD was created as an extension to the STROBE statement to address reporting items specific to observational studies using routinely collected health data. RECORD consists of a checklist of 13 items related to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion section of articles, and other information required for inclusion in such research reports. This document contains the checklist and explanatory and elaboration information to enhance the use of the checklist. Examples of good reporting for each RECORD checklist item are also included herein. This document, as well as the accompanying website and message board (http://www.record-statement.org), will enhance the implementation and understanding of RECORD. Through implementation of RECORD, authors, journals editors, and peer reviewers can encourage transparency of research reporting.

Multimorbidity and Patient Safety Incidents in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity is increasingly prevalent and represents a major challenge in primary care. Patients with multimorbidity are potentially more likely to experience safety incidents due to the complexity of their needs and frequency of their interactions with health services. However, rigorous syntheses of the link between patient safety incidents and multimorbidity are not available. This review examined the relationship between multimorbidity and patient safety incidents in primary care.

METHODS

We followed our published protocol (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014007434). Medline, Embase and CINAHL were searched up to May 2015. Study design and quality were assessed. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated for the associations between multimorbidity and two categories of patient safety outcomes: 'active patient safety incidents' (such as adverse drug events and medical complications) and 'precursors of safety incidents' (such as prescription errors, medication non-adherence, poor quality of care and diagnostic errors). Meta-analyses using random effects models were undertaken.

RESULTS

Eighty six relevant comparisons from 75 studies were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis demonstrated that physical-mental multimorbidity was associated with an increased risk for 'active patient safety incidents' (OR = 2.39, 95% CI = 1.40 to 3.38) and 'precursors of safety incidents' (OR = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.36 to 2.03). Physical multimorbidity was associated with an increased risk for active safety incidents (OR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.45 to 1.80) but was not associated with precursors of safety incidents (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.90 to 1.13). Statistical heterogeneity was high and the methodological quality of the studies was generally low.

CONCLUSIONS

The association between multimorbidity and patient safety is complex, and varies by type of multimorbidity and type of safety incident. Our analyses suggest that multimorbidity involving mental health may be a key driver of safety incidents, which has important implication for the design and targeting of interventions to improve safety. High quality studies examining the mechanisms of patient safety incidents in patients with multimorbidity are needed, with the goal of promoting effective service delivery and ameliorating threats to safety in this group of patients.

Impact of multi-morbidity on quality of healthcare and its implications for health policy, research and clinical practice. A scoping review

The simultaneous presence of multiple conditions in one patient (multi-morbidity) is a key challenge facing healthcare systems globally. It potentially threatens the coordination, continuity and safety of care. In this paper, we report the results of a scoping review examining the impact of multi-morbidity on the quality of healthcare. We used its results as a basis for a discussion of the challenges that research in this area is currently facing. In addition, we discuss its implications for health policy and clinical practice. The review identified 37 studies focussing on multi-morbidity but using conceptually different approaches. Studies focusing on 'comorbidity' (i.e. the 'index disease' approach) suggested that quality may be enhanced in the presence of synergistic conditions, and impaired by antagonistic or neutral conditions. Studies on 'multi-morbidity' (i.e. multiplicity of problems) and 'morbidity burden' (i.e. the total severity of conditions) suggested that increasing number of conditions and severity may be associated with better quality of healthcare when measured by process or intermediate outcome indicators, but with worse quality when patient-centred measures are used. However, issues related to the conceptualization and measurement of multi-morbidity (inconsistent across studies) and of healthcare quality (restricted to evaluations for each separate condition without incorporating considerations about multi-morbidity itself and its implications for management) compromised the generalizability of these observations. Until these issues are addressed and robust evidence becomes available, clinicians should apply minimally invasive and patient-centred medicine when delivering care for clinically complex patients. Health systems should focus on enhancing primary care centred coordination and continuity of care.