Dataset Information

A comparison of two structured taxonomic strategies in capturing adverse events in U.S. hospitals.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To compare the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Quality and Safety Review System (QSRS) and the proposed triadic structure for the 11th version of the International Classification of Disease (ICD-11) in their ability to capture adverse events in U.S. hospitals.

Data sources/study setting

One thousand patient admissions between 2014 and 2016 from three general, acute care hospitals located in Maryland and Washington D.C.

Study design

The admissions chosen for the study were a random sample from all three hospitals.

Data collection/extraction methods

All 1000 admissions were abstracted through QSRS by one set of Certified Coding Specialists and a different set of coders assigned the draft ICD-11 codes. Previously assigned ICD-10-CM codes for 230 of the admissions were also used.

Principal findings

We found less than 20 percent agreement between QSRS and ICD-11 in identifying the same adverse event. The likelihood of a mismatch between QSRS and ICD-11 was almost twice that of a match. The findings were similar to the agreement found between QSRS and ICD-10-CM in identifying the same adverse event. When coders were provided with a list of potential adverse events, the sensitivity and negative predictive value of ICD-11 improved.

Conclusions

While ICD-11 may offer an efficient way of identifying adverse events, our analysis found that in its draft form, it has a limited ability to capture the same types of events as QSRS. Coders may require additional training on identifying adverse events in the chart if ICD-11 is going to prove its maximum benefit.

SUBMITTER: Austin JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6505417 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A comparison of two structured taxonomic strategies in capturing adverse events in U.S. hospitals.

Austin John M JM Kirley Erin M EM Rosen Michael A MA Winters Bradford D BD

Health services research 20181125 3

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Quality and Safety Review System (QSRS) and the proposed triadic structure for the 11th version of the International Classification of Disease (ICD-11) in their ability to capture adverse events in U.S. hospitals.<h4>Data sources/study setting</h4>One thousand patient admissions between 2014 and 2016 from three general, acute care hospitals located in Maryland and Washington D.C.<h4>Study design</h4>The admissions chos ...[more]

PMID: 30474108

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLimited data are available on adverse events among children admitted to hospital. The Canadian Paediatric Adverse Events Study was done to describe the epidemiology of adverse events among children in hospital in Canada.MethodsWe performed a 2-stage medical record review at 8 academic pediatric centres and 14 community hospitals in Canada. We reviewed charts from patients admitted from April 2008 through March 2009, evenly distributed across 4 age groups (0 to 28 d; 29 to 365 d; > 1 to 5 yr and > 5 to 18 yr). In stage 1, nurses and health records personnel who had received training in the use of the Canadian Paediatric Trigger Tool reviewed medical records to detect triggers for possible adverse events. In stage 2, physicians reviewed the charts identified as having triggers and described the adverse events.ResultsA total of 3669 children were admitted to hospital during the study period. The weighted rate of adverse events was 9.2%. Adverse events were more frequent in academic pediatric centres than in community hospitals (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.65-5.39). The incidence of preventable adverse events was not significantly different between types of hospital, but nonpreventable adverse events were more common in academic pediatric centres (adjusted OR 4.39, 95% CI 2.08-9.27). Surgical events predominated overall and occurred more frequently in academic pediatric centres than in community hospitals (37.2% v. 21.5%, relative risk [RR] 1.7, 95% CI 1.0-3.1), whereas events associated with diagnostic errors were significantly less frequent (11.1% v. 23.1%, RR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2-0.9).InterpretationMore children have adverse events in academic pediatric centres than in community hospitals; however, adverse events in the former are less likely to be preventable. There are many opportunities to reduce harm affecting children in hospital in Canada, particularly related to surgery, intensive care and diagnostic error.

Project description:Background: The chemical part of the exposome, including drugs, may explain the increase of health effects with outcomes such as infertility, allergies, metabolic disorders, which cannot be only explained by the genetic changes. To better understand how drug exposure can impact human health, the concepts of adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) and AOP networks (AONs), which are representations of causally linked events at different biological levels leading to adverse health, could be used for drug safety assessment. Methods: To explore the action of drugs across multiple scales of the biological organization, we investigated the use of a network-based approach in the known AOP space. Considering the drugs and their associations to biological events, such as molecular initiating event and key event, a bipartite network was developed. This bipartite network was projected into a monopartite network capturing the event-event linkages. Nevertheless, such transformation of a bipartite network to a monopartite network had a huge risk of information loss. A way to solve this problem is to quantify the network reduction. We calculated two scoring systems, one measuring the uncertainty and a second one describing the loss of coverage on the developed event-event network to better investigate events from AOPs linked to drugs. Results: This AON analysis allowed us to identify biological events that are highly connected to drugs, such as events involving nuclear receptors (ER, AR, and PXR/SXR). Furthermore, we observed that the number of events involved in a linkage pattern with drugs is a key factor that influences information loss during monopartite network projection. Such scores have the potential to quantify the uncertainty of an event involved in an AON, and could be valuable for the weight of evidence assessment of AOPs. A case study related to infertility, more specifically to "decrease, male agenital distance" is presented. Conclusion: This study highlights that computational approaches based on network science may help to understand the complexity of drug health effects, with the aim to support drug safety assessment.

Project description:BackgroundMedication errors and adverse drug events are universal problems contributing to patient harm but the magnitude of these problems in Africa remains unclear.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to systematically investigate the literature on the extent of medication errors and adverse drug events, and the factors contributing to medication errors in African hospitals.MethodsWe searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Global Health databases from inception to 31 August, 2017 and hand searched the reference lists of included studies. Original research studies of any design published in English that investigated adverse drug events and/or medication errors in any patient population in the hospital setting in Africa were included. Descriptive statistics including median and interquartile range were presented.ResultsFifty-one studies were included; of these, 33 focused on medication errors, 15 on adverse drug events, and three studies focused on medication errors and adverse drug events. These studies were conducted in nine (of the 54) African countries. In any patient population, the median (interquartile range) percentage of patients reported to have experienced any suspected adverse drug event at hospital admission was 8.4% (4.5-20.1%), while adverse drug events causing admission were reported in 2.8% (0.7-6.4%) of patients but it was reported that a median of 43.5% (20.0-47.0%) of the adverse drug events were deemed preventable. Similarly, the median mortality rate attributed to adverse drug events was reported to be 0.1% (interquartile range 0.0-0.3%). The most commonly reported types of medication errors were prescribing errors, occurring in a median of 57.4% (interquartile range 22.8-72.8%) of all prescriptions and a median of 15.5% (interquartile range 7.5-50.6%) of the prescriptions evaluated had dosing problems. Major contributing factors for medication errors reported in these studies were individual practitioner factors (e.g. fatigue and inadequate knowledge/training) and environmental factors, such as workplace distraction and high workload.ConclusionMedication errors in the African healthcare setting are relatively common, and the impact of adverse drug events is substantial but many are preventable. This review supports the design and implementation of preventative strategies targeting the most likely contributing factors.

Project description:The efficacy and safety of herbal supplements suffer from challenges due to non-uniform representation of ingredient terms within biomedical and observational health data sources. The nature of how supplement data are reported within Spontaneous Reporting Systems (SRS) can limit analyses of supplement-associated adverse events due to the use of incorrect nomenclature or failing to identify herbs. This study aimed to extract, standardize, and summarize supplement-relevant reports from two SRSs: (1) Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and (2) Canada Vigilance Adverse Reaction (CVAR) database. A thesaurus of plant names was developed and integrated with a mapping and normalization approach that accommodated misspellings and variants. The reports gathered from FAERS between the years 2004 and 2016 show 185,915 herbal and 7,235,330 non-herbal accounting for 2.51%. The data from CVAR found 36,940 reports of herbal and 503,580 non-herbal reports between the years 1965 and 2017 for a total of 6.83%. Although not all cases were actual adverse events due to numerous variables and incomplete reporting, it is interesting to note that the herbs most frequently reported and significantly associated with adverse events were as follows: Avena sativa (Oats), Cannabis sativa (marijuana), Digitalis purpurea (foxglove), Humulus lupulus (hops), Hypericum perforatum (St John's Wort), Paullinia cupana (guarana), Phleum pretense (timothy-grass), Silybum marianum (milk thistle), Taraxacum officinale (Dandelion), and Valeriana officinalis (valerian). Using a scalable approach for mapping and resolution of herb names allowed data-driven exploration of potential adverse events from sources that have remained isolated in this specific area of research. The results from this study highlight several herb-associated safety issues providing motivation for subsequent in-depth analyses, including those that focus on the scope and severity of potential safety issues with supplement use.

Dataset Information

A comparison of two structured taxonomic strategies in capturing adverse events in U.S. hospitals.

Objective

Data sources/study setting

Study design

Data collection/extraction methods

Principal findings

Conclusions

Publications

A comparison of two structured taxonomic strategies in capturing adverse events in U.S. hospitals.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets