Automatic Surveillance and Pediatric Trigger Tools Thursday, June 19, 2008 12:00 – 1:00 p.m.
Download ReportTranscript Automatic Surveillance and Pediatric Trigger Tools Thursday, June 19, 2008 12:00 – 1:00 p.m.
Automatic Surveillance and Pediatric Trigger Tools Thursday, June 19, 2008 12:00 – 1:00 p.m. EDT © American Academy of Pediatrics 2008 Moderator: Paul Sharek, MD, MPH, FAAP Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, Stanford School of Medicine Medical Director of Quality Management Chief Clinical Patient Safety Officer Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital Palo Alto, California DISCLOSURES Financial Relationships One individual involved in this webinar: Melissa A. Singleton, M.Ed., Project Manager-Consultant has disclosed a financial relationship with an entity producing, marketing, re-selling, or distributing health care goods or services consumed by, or used on, patients. Her husband is employed by Walgreen Co. as a Workforce Administration Manager (technology position) for the company’s call centers. The AAP determined that this financial relationship does not relate to the educational assignment. None of the other involved individuals (Speakers, Moderators, Project Advisory Committee members, or Staff) has disclosed a relevant financial relationship. Refer to full AAP Disclosure Policy & Grid available below for download. DISCLOSURES Off-Label/Investigational Uses None of the individuals (Speakers, Moderators, Project Advisory Committee members, or Staff) has disclosed that they intend to discuss or demonstrate pharmaceuticals and/or medical devices that are not approved. Refer to full AAP Disclosure Policy & Grid available below for download. This activity was funded through an educational grant from the Physicians’ Foundation for Health Systems Excellence. Visit our website: http://www.aap.org/saferhealthcare Resources: Useful strategies, valuable information links, and expert advice on reducing or eliminating medical errors affecting children. Webinars: Register for an upcoming, live Webinar, and earn a maximum of 1.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™. Or, access a full archive, including audio, from one of the past Webinar offerings. Or, download just the Podcast or slide set from an archive. Latest News: Links to recent articles relating to pediatric patient safety. Email List: An e-community dedicated to pediatric patient safety issues and information exchange with other clinicians. Parents’ Corner: Resources to help parents understand what they can do to help ensure their optimal safety in the health care that their child receives. CME CREDIT Live Webinar Only The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AAP designates this educational activity for a maximum of 1.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™. Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. This activity is acceptable for up to 1.0 AAP credits. These credits can be applied toward the AAP CME/CPD Award available to Fellows and Candidate Members of the American Academy of Pediatrics. OTHER CREDIT Live Webinar Only This program is approved for 1.0 NAPNAP contact hours of which 0 contain pharmacology (Rx) content per the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners Continuing Education Guidelines. The American Academy of Physician Assistants accepts AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)TM from organizations accredited by the ACCME. Speaker: Jeffrey M. Ferranti, MD, MS, FAAP Associate Chief Information Officer Duke University Health System Durham, North Carolina Speaker: Anne Matlow, MD, FRCPC Director, Infection Prevention and Control Programme Medical Director, Patient Safety The Hospital for Sick Children Toronto, Ontario, Canada LEARNING OBJECTIVES Upon completion of the webinar, participants will be able to: • List the various methodologies employed to detect adverse events in health care. • Describe the role of technology in the detection and prevention of adverse events. • Discuss the epidemiology of adverse events in the pediatric population. Bridging the Gap Understanding the role of Technology in the Detection and Prevention Of Pediatric Adverse Drug Events Jeffrey M. Ferranti, MD, MS, FAAP Associate CIO Enterprise Analytics and Patient Safety Duke University Health System The Institute of Medicine Reports • To Err is Human (2000)1 • Defines Scope of the Problem • Defines Cost of the Problem • Establishes National Focus on Safety • Crossing the Quality Chasm (2001)2 • Strategies for Improving Care Delivery • A Focus on Evidence Based Medicine • A Focus on Information Technology 1. Institute of Medicine. To Err is Human. Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 2000. 2. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm. Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 2001. The Recent IOM Report • Preventing Medication Errors (2006) 1 • Employ error detection methodologies in “Health allcare care systems settings should capture information onmedication medication and use • Assess the usesafety process this information tomonitoring improve the safety of through active 1 their care delivery systems.” • Computerized detection of ADEs should complement voluntary reporting 1. Institute of Medicine. Preventing Medication Errors: Quality Chasm Series. Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 2006. Targeting Outcomes is Essential Medication Errors ADEs Endpoint of quality improvement should be the measurable reduction in patient harm rather than medical errors per se Bates DW, et al. Effect of Computerized Physician Order Entry and a Team Intervention on Prevention of Serious Medication Errors. JAMA,1998. 280(15):1311-1316. Error Monitoring at Duke A Multi Faceted Approach • The Qualitative Approach Safety Reporting (SRS) – Provides qualitative data that informs safety and quality initiatives – Recent upgrade to SRS 2.0 which standardizes the reporting process – Not a reliable metric. • The Quantitative Approach ADE-S – Computerized detection of ADEs; Excellent Metric – Based on the gold standard of manual chart review – Standardized scoring system, published inter-rater reliability • The Global Approach IHI Trigger Tool – New Initiative to review 20 charts per month Synergistic Safety Event Detection Methodologies DUH February 2008 ADE-Surveillance CS>=5, SI>=3 Voluntary Reporting SI>=3 189 64 3 The DUHS Voluntary Safety Reporting System (SRS) The Qualitative Approach Voluntary Safety Reporting System (SRS) The DUHS Automated Adverse Drug Event Surveillance System The Quantitative Approach Computerized ADE Surveillance ADE Database ADT Pharmacist Review Lab Pharmacy Orders Event Report Generator CDR Daily Reports Possible ADEs to Pharmacist for Review Naranjo SI “It is much more important to know what sort of a patient has a disease than what sort of disease a patient has” 1 1. William Osler. Aequanimitas: With Other Addresses to Medical Students, Nurses and Practitioners of Medicine. New York: McGraw Hill. 1932. Background • Although much has been published on ADE detection in adult populations, less is known about Pediatric ADEs • A recent study demonstrated an 11.1% ADE rate in Children • The potential for adverse drug events in children is estimated to be three times higher than adult patients • Children are not little adults. Tools must be tailored to meet their unique needs. - Takata, GS, et al: Development, Testing, and Findings of a Pediatric-Focused Trigger Tool to Identify Medication-Related Harm in US Children’s Hospitals. Pediatrics, 2008, 121:e927-3935. - Goldmann D, Kaushal R. Time to tackle the tough issues in patient safety. Pediatrics. 2002;110(4):823–826 - Kaushal R, Bates DW, Landrigan C, et al. Medication errors and adverse drug events in pediatric inpatients. JAMA. 2001; 285(16):2114–2120 Why are Children at High Risk • Children have fragile physiologies which put them at high risk for harm when medication errors occur • Most medications used in children are packaged for adults • Many pediatric doses are hand calculated • Many children are cared for in mixed adult and pediatric environments - Committee on the Future of Emergency Healthcare in the United States; the Institute of Medicine; Emergency Care for Children: Growing Pains. - Koren G. 10-fold errors in administration of drug dosing: a neglected iatrogenic disease in pediatrics. Pediatrics ; 1986: 848-849. - Vincer MJ. Drug Errors and incidents in a neonatal intensive care unit: A quality assurance activity. Am J Dis Child. 1989; 143: 737-740. - Cowley E, Williams R, Cousins D. Medication Errors in Children: A Descriptive Summary of Medication Error Reports Submitted to the US Pharmacopeia. Curr. Therapeutic Research. 2001; 62 (9) Goals – Compare and contrast voluntary ADE reporting and automated ADE surveillance in a pediatric population – Determine ADE rates as determined by each detection methodology – Identify the primary drug classes involved in pediatric events – Outline areas where one detection methodology is superior to the other – Suggest areas for improvement Methods • Cohort – All patients receiving service on 7 inpatient pediatric units (3 ICUs, 2 general care, 2 transitional care) from December 2004 – Jan 2006. • Voluntary Safety Reporting System (SRS) – Reported events scored for severity by medication safety pharmacists and categorized by drug and event details • Automated ADE Surveillance (ADE-S) – Manual chart review of all computerized triggers, which are scored for severity and causality by clinical pharmacists (kappa >0.88) and grouped into drug category • Data analysis – Descriptive statistics of ADE rates (events/1000 patient days) – Categorical data analysis to compare rates among groups Results • Voluntary reporting: 93 ADEs from 849 reports • 1.8 events/1000 patient days • Surveillance: 78 ADEs from 1537 reports • 1.6 events/1000 patient days • Overlap: Only 4 ADEs shared between the two methods • Event location: Most ADEs occur in critical care units Results Conclusions • Quantitative approach for known high risk drugs = ADE surveillance • Qualitative approach to define the types of ADEs = Voluntary reporting Surveillance rules designed for adults (7.5/1000 patient days) perform poorly in pediatrics (1.6/1000 patient days), meaning pediatricspecific rule sets may be required Bridging the Gap Empowering Caregivers with Direct Access to Safety Data Tabular Trending Report Aggregate Trending Report Detailed Event Descriptions Severity Index 4: DrugDrug Category Significant adverse patient effects occurred which required an intervention such as a code, intubation, transfer to a higher level of care, interventional drug therapy or increased length of stay > 2 days Morphine Anticoagulants Benzodiazepines Oxycodone Fentanyl Antineoplastic Agents Opiate Agonists Hydromorphone Anticoagulants Morphine Hypotensive Agents Misc.Methadone Antibiotics Hydantoins Insulins OxycodoneMisc Anti-Infectives Acetaminophen Quinilones HydrocodoneReplacement Preparations Acetaminophen Roentgenography Remifentanil Sympathomimetics Antineoplastics Fentanyl Opiate Agonists Benzodiazepines Hydromorphone Oxycodone Healthcare IT at Duke Past, Present, and Future “Error Detection in All Care Settings” OR View 2000 E-Rx 2007