Resource Page

Randomised controlled trial of audit-and-feedback strategies to reduce imaging overutilisation in the emergency department

Quality and Safety in Health Care Journal -

Background

Evaluation of neck trauma is a common reason for emergency department (ED) visits. There are several validated clinical decision rules, such as the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) Cervical Spine (C-spine) Rule, that can be used to risk stratify these patients and identify low-risk patients who do not require CT imaging. Overutilisation of CT imaging exposes patients to unnecessary radiation, impairs hospital throughput and increases healthcare costs. Various audit-and-feedback strategies have been described in other settings, but it is not known whether these strategies are effective for reducing imaging overutilisation in the ED. Additionally, the effectiveness of face-to-face feedback strategies as compared with digital feedback strategies for addressing this problem has not been previously evaluated. The aim of this study was to compare audit-and-feedback strategies to reduce CT overutilisation in the ED.

Methods

This was a prospective randomised controlled trial, in which emergency medicine clinicians were randomised into three arms to receive digital feedback, hybrid face-to-face/digital feedback or no feedback. Each clinician received three rounds of feedback on patient encounters in which they ordered a CT of the C-spine. Patient encounters were retrospectively reviewed to determine each clinician’s overutilisation rate, defined as the percentage of patients who underwent CT of the C-spine despite being classified as low risk by NEXUS criteria.

Results

A total of 78 emergency medicine clinicians were randomised into three arms. Baseline overutilisation rates for each group were 46%–47% of CT of the C-spine studies. After three rounds of audit-and-feedback strategy, the clinicians in the digital feedback group had an overutilisation rate of 33%, compared with 44% in the control group (p=0.020). The hybrid feedback group had an overutilisation rate of 36% (p=0.055 vs control; p=0.577 vs digital feedback). Over the study period, the digital group saw a reduction of 1.26 CT of the C-spine studies per provider per month (p=0.049), and the hybrid feedback group saw a reduction of 1.43 CTs per provider per month (p=0.044).

Conclusion

A digital audit-and-feedback strategy is effective for reducing overutilisation of CT imaging of the C-spine in the ED, while the effectiveness of a hybrid strategy requires further investigation.

Does the use of structured interventions to guide ward rounds affect patient outcomes? A systematic review

Quality and Safety in Health Care Journal -

Background

Ward rounds are an essential activity occurring in hospital settings. Despite their fundamental role in guiding patient care, they have no standardised approach. Implementation of structured interventions during ward rounds was shown to improve outcomes such as efficiency, documentation and communication. Whether these improvements have an impact on clinical outcomes is unclear. Our systematic review assessed whether structured interventions to guide ward rounds affect patient outcomes.

Methods

A systematic search was carried out in May 2023 on Embase, Medline, CINAHL, ERIC, Web of Science Core Collection, the Cochrane Library (Wiley) and Google Scholar, and a backward and forward citation search in January 2024. We included peer-reviewed, original studies assessing the use of structured interventions during bedside ward rounds (BWRs) on clinical outcomes. All inpatient hospital settings where BWRs are performed were included. We excluded papers looking at board, teaching or medication rounds.

Results

Our search strategy yielded 29 studies. Two were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 27 were quasi-experimental interventional studies. The majority (79%) were conducted in intensive care units. The main clinical outcomes reported were mortality, infectious complications, length of stay (LOS) and duration of mechanical ventilation (DoMV). Mortality, LOS and rates of urinary tract and central-line associated bloodstream infections did not seem to be affected, positively or negatively, by interventions structuring BWRs, while evidence was conflicting regarding their effects on rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia and DoMV, with a signal towards improved outcomes. Studies were generally of low-to-moderate quality.

Conclusion

The impact of structured interventions during BWRs on clinical outcomes remains inconclusive. Higher quality research focusing on multicentric RCTs or on prospective pre–post trials with concurrent cohorts, matched for key characteristics, is needed.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42023412637.

Integrating equity into incident reporting and patient concerns systems: a critical interpretive synthesis

Quality and Safety in Health Care Journal -

Background

Hospital incident reporting and patient concerns systems are widely used to detect and respond to patient harm. Despite increasing recognition of the link between equity and safety, equity remains poorly integrated into the design and function of these systems. Consequently, these systems risk obscuring or reproducing inequities rather than revealing and attending to them.

Objective

To examine how issues of equity are currently considered in research about hospital incident reporting and patient concerns systems and identify opportunities to more systematically include equity in how patient safety is addressed.

Methods

A critical interpretive synthesis was conducted to develop a theoretical understanding of the topic through inductive analysis and interpretation. The databases CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO were searched from database inception to 6 February 2024. Select social science, patient safety and health services literature supported the interpretive process.

Results

After screening 6508 abstracts and conducting hand searches, we included 30 articles in our review. Our analysis identified four equity-related themes. The first theme describes how knowledge injustices in ‘what counts as a safety event or contributor’ shape what patient issues are recognised, recorded and addressed. The second theme examines how individual bias and systemic discrimination affect which safety events and concerns get reported. The third theme explores both opportunities and limitations of stratifying data to uncover equity-related patterns of harm. The fourth theme presents alternate frameworks, including restorative and human rights approaches, as ways to address inequities and humanise harm.

Conclusion

The findings provide direction for changes within incident reporting and patient concerns practices (eg, expanding definitions of harms; creating accessible and culturally safe patient concerns systems). They also affirm the opportunity to learn from, and build on, initiatives such as taking a restorative approach that moves beyond a customer service and risk management framing.

From SMART aims to systems thinking: expanding the scope of quality improvement and patient safety education

Quality and Safety in Health Care Journal -

Since the Institute of Medicine released its landmark report in 19991 highlighting serious concerns about patient safety (PS) and the quality of healthcare in the USA, training programmes around the world have made quality improvement (QI) and PS key components of resident education and experience. In recognising that physicians must learn to interact with and adapt to a constantly changing healthcare environment, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and ACGME International (ACGME-I) identified QI and PS as two of the six ‘Pathways of Excellence’ expected in an optimal clinical learning environment.2 In this journal, Molina et al present an exemplary effort to train the next generation of healthcare professionals in improvement science.3 This 13-year QI initiative in a large paediatric residency programme demonstrated how applying QI methodology to the educational programme itself can strengthen resident training. Through phased interventions—including structured didactics,...

More alerts, less harm? Rethinking medication safety with AI

Quality and Safety in Health Care Journal -

Medication-related problems remain one of the leading causes of patient harm.1 Studies show that advances in electronic health records (EHR) and computerised prescribing systems with clinical decision support (CDS) have reduced prescription errors, improved physician performance and patient outcomes. However, these effects are not universally experienced and are influenced by usability, perceived usefulness, relevance and efficiency.2 3

Medication-related CDS can be classified as basic (eg, drug-drug interaction (DDI) or drug-allergy checks) or advanced, whereby patient-specific information in the EHR is used (eg, drug-disease contraindication or drug-laboratory test checks).4 However, a key persistent issue with CDS is alert fatigue, where clinically important alerts are ignored alongside alerts that are not clinically important or relevant. This is exacerbated when healthcare providers are presented with excessive and unimportant alerts, resulting in high alert override rates.5 Indeed, DDI software is often associated with...

Pages

Subscribe to Medication Safety Officers Society- MSOS aggregator - Resource Page