Dataset Information

Health Care Provider Factors Associated with Patient-Reported Adverse Events and Harm.

ABSTRACT: Background: Patients can provide valuable information missing from traditional sources of safety data, thus adding new insights about factors that lead to preventable harm. In this study, researchers determined associations between patient-reported contributory factors and patient-reported harms experienced after an adverse event (AE).

Methods: A secondary analysis was conducted of a national sample of patient-reported AEs (surgical, medication, diagnostic, and hospital-acquired infection) gathered through an online questionnaire between January 2010 and February 2016. Generalized logit multivariable regression was used to assess the association between patient-reported contributory factors and patient-reported harms (grouped as nonphysical harm only, physical harm only, physical harm and emotional or financial harm, and all three harms) and adjusted for patient and AE characteristics.

Results: One third of patients (32.6%) reported experiencing all three harms, 27.3% reported physical harms and one additional harm, 25.5% reported physical harms only, and 14.7% reported nonphysical harms only. Patients reporting all three harms were 2.5 times more likely to have filed a report with a responsible authority (95% confidence interval [CI]?=?1.23-5.01) and 3.3 times more likely to have also experienced a surgical complication (95% CI?=?1.42-7.51). Odds of reporting problems related to communication between clinician and patients/families or clinician-related behavioral issues was 13% higher in those experiencing all three harm types (95% CI?=?1.07-1.19).

Conclusion: Patients' experiences are important to identify safety issues and reduce harm and should be included in patient safety measurement and improvement activities. These findings underscore the need for policy and practice changes to identify, address, and support harmed patients.

SUBMITTER: Giardina TD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7720932 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Health Care Provider Factors Associated with Patient-Reported Adverse Events and Harm.

Giardina Traber D TD Royse Kathryn E KE Khanna Arushi A Haskell Helen H Hallisy Julia J Southwick Frederick F Singh Hardeep H

Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety 20200221 5

<h4>Background</h4>Patients can provide valuable information missing from traditional sources of safety data, thus adding new insights about factors that lead to preventable harm. In this study, researchers determined associations between patient-reported contributory factors and patient-reported harms experienced after an adverse event (AE).<h4>Methods</h4>A secondary analysis was conducted of a national sample of patient-reported AEs (surgical, medication, diagnostic, and hospital-acquired inf ...[more]

PMID: 32362355

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe effect electronic health record (EHR) implementation has on physician satisfaction and patient care remains unclear. A better understanding of physician perceptions of EHRs and factors that influence those perceptions is needed to improve the physician and patient experience when using EHRs.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine provider and clinical practice factors associated with physician EHR satisfaction and perception of patient impact.MethodsWe surveyed a random sample of physicians, including residents and fellows, at a US quaternary care academic hospital from February to March 2016. The survey assessed provider demographics, clinical practice factors (ie, attending, fellow, or resident), and overall EHR experience. The primary outcomes assessed were provider satisfaction and provider perceptions of impact to patient care. Responses on the satisfaction and patient impact questions were recorded on a continuous scale initially anchored at neutral (scale range 0 to 100: 0 defined as "extremely negatively" and 100 as "extremely positively"). Independent variables assessed included demographic and clinical practice factors, including perceived efficiency in using the EHR. One-way analysis of variance or the Kruskal-Wallis test was used for bivariate comparisons, and linear regression was used for multivariable modeling.ResultsOf 157 physicians, 111 (70.7%) completed the survey; 51.4% (57/111) of the respondents were attending physicians, and of those, 71.9% (41/57) reported a >50% clinical full-time-equivalency and half reported supervising residents >50% of the time. A total of 50.5% (56/111) of the respondents were primary care practitioners, previous EHR experience was evenly distributed, and 12.6% (14/111) of the total sample were EHR super-users. Responses to how our current EHR affects satisfaction were rated above the neutral survey anchor point (mean 58 [SD 22]), as were their perceptions as to how the EHR impacts the patient (mean 61 [SD 18]). In bivariate comparisons, only physician age, clinical role (resident, fellow, or attending), and perceived efficiency were associated with EHR satisfaction. In the linear regression models, physicians with higher reported perceived efficiency reported higher overall satisfaction and patient impact after controlling for other variables in the model.ConclusionsPhysician satisfaction with EHRs and their perception of its impact on clinical care were generally positive, but physician characteristics, greater age, and attending level were associated with worse EHR satisfaction. Perceived efficiency is the factor most associated with physician satisfaction with EHRs when controlling for other factors. Understanding physician perceptions of EHRs may allow targeting of technology resources to ensure efficiency and satisfaction with EHR system use during clinical care.

Project description:Importance:The collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) has garnered intense interest, but dissemination of PRO programs has been limited, as have analyses of the factors associated with successful programs. Objective:To identify factors associated with improving PRO collection rates within a large health care system using a centralized PRO infrastructure. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cohort study included 205 medical and surgical clinics in the Partners Healthcare system in Massachusetts that implemented a PRO program between March 15, 2014, and December 31, 2018, using a standardized centralized infrastructure. Data were analyzed from March to April 2019. Exposures:Relevant clinical characteristics were recorded for each clinic launching a PRO program. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was the mean PRO collection rate during each clinic's most recent 6 months of collection prior to January 2019. Data were analyzed using a linear regression model with the 6-month PRO collection rate as the dependent variable and clinic characteristics as independent variables. Secondary analysis used a logistic regression model to assess clinical factors associated with successful clinics, defined as those that collected PROs at a rate greater than 50%. Results:Between March 2014 and December 2018, 205 Partners Healthcare clinics were available for analysis, and 4?061?205 PRO measures from 745?028 encounters were collected. Among these, 103 clinics (50.2%) collected at a rate greater than 50%. Increased collection rates were associated with more than 50% of physicians in a clinic trained on PROs (change, 19.6% [95% CI, 9.9%-29.4%]; P?<?.001), routine administrative oversight of collection rates (change, 16.0% [95% CI, 6.6%-25.5%]; P?=?.001), previous collection of PROs on paper (change, 12.5% [95% CI, 4.7%-20.3%]; P?=?.002), presence of a clinical champion (change, 11.2% [95% CI, 2.5%-20.0%]; P?=?.01) and payer incentive (change, 10.5% [95% CI, 2.0%-18.9%]; P?=?.02). Conclusions and Relevance:These findings suggest that training physicians on the use of PROs, administrative surveillance of collection rates, and the presence of a local clinical champion may be promising interventions for increasing PRO collection. Clinics that have previously collected PROs may have greater success in increasing collections. Payer incentive for collection was associated with improved collections, but not associated with successful programs.

Project description:Background. A culture of stringent drug policy, one-size-fits-all treatment approaches, and drug-related stigma has clouded clinical HIV practice in the United States. The result is a series of missed opportunities in the HIV care environment. An approach which may address the broken relationship between patient and provider is harm reduction-which removes judgment and operates at the patient's stage of readiness. Harm reduction is not a routine part of care; rather, it exists outside clinic walls, exacerbating the divide between compassionate, stigma-free services and the medical system. Methods. Qualitative, phenomenological, semi-structured, individual interviews with patients and providers were conducted in three publicly-funded clinics in Chicago, located in areas of high HIV prevalence and drug use and serving African-American patients (N = 38). A deductive thematic analysis guided the process, including: the creation of an index code list, transcription and verification of interviews, manual coding, notation of emerging themes and refinement of code definitions, two more rounds of coding within AtlasTi, calculation of Cohen's Kappa for interrater reliability, queries of major codes and analysis of additional common themes. Results. Thematic analysis of findings indicated that the majority of patients felt receptive to harm reduction interventions (safer injection counseling, safer stimulant use counseling, overdose prevention information, supply provision) from their provider, and expressed anticipated gratitude for harm reduction information and/or supplies within the HIV care visit, although some were reluctant to talk openly about their drug use. Provider results were mixed, with more receptivity reported by advanced practice nurses, and more barriers cited by physicians. Notable barriers included: role-perceptions, limited time, inadequate training, and the patients themselves. Discussion. Patients are willing to receive harm reduction interventions from their HIV care providers, while provider receptiveness is mixed. The findings reveal critical implications for diffusion of harm reduction into HIV care, including the need to address cited barriers for both patients and providers to ensure feasibility of implementation. Strategies to address these barriers are discussed, and recommendations for further research are also shared.

Project description:BackgroundPromoting medication adherence is a recognized challenge for prescribers. In this study, we examine whether lower medication adherence is associated with adverse safety events in individuals with decreased estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs).Study designCross-sectional baseline analysis of prospective cohort.Setting & participantsBaseline analysis of the Safe Kidney Care (SKC) Cohort Study, a prospective study of individuals with eGFRs<60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) intended to assess the incidence of disease-specific safety events. Kidney transplant recipients were excluded.PredictorSelf-reported medication adherence based on responses to 3 questions ascertaining degree of medication regimen adherence.OutcomesAdverse safety events were self-reported at baseline (class I events), such as hypoglycemia or fall thought to be related to a medication, or detected incidentally during the baseline visit (class II events), for example, hypotension or hyperkalemia. Potential drug-related problems (DRPs) were determined by analyzing participants' medications with respect to dosing guidelines based on their screening eGFRs at the time of medication reporting.MeasurementsRelationship between medication adherence and disease-specific patient safety events.ResultsOf 293 SKC participants, 154 (53%) were classified as having lower medication adherence. After multivariable adjustment, lower medication adherence was significantly associated with a class I or II safety event (prevalence ratio [PR], 1.21; 95% CI, 1.04-1.41) and potential DRPs (PR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.02-1.63). Lower medication adherence was also significantly associated with multiple (≥2) class I events (PR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.18-2.49), multiple class I or II events (PR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.04-1.76), and multiple potential DRPs (PR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.08-2.69) compared with those with higher medication adherence.LimitationsUse of self-reported medication adherence rather than pharmacy records. Clinical relevance of detected safety events is unclear.ConclusionsLower medication adherence is associated with adverse safety events in individuals with eGFRs<60 mL/min/1.73 m(2).

Project description:PurposeYoung cancer survivors are at increased risk for morbidities related to infection with the human papillomavirus (HPV), yet their HPV vaccine initiation rates remain low. Patient-/parent-reported lack of health care provider recommendation for HPV vaccination is strongly associated with vaccine noninitiation. We aimed to identify patient-level factors associated with survivor-/parent-reported lack of provider recommendation for HPV vaccination among young cancer survivors.MethodsCancer survivors ages 9-26 years and 1-5 years off therapy completed a cross-sectional survey (parent-completed for survivors 9-17 years of age). Lack of health care provider HPV vaccine recommendation was the outcome of interest in a multivariable logistic regression model that included relevant patient-level sociodemographic, clinical, and vaccine-related variables.ResultsOf 955 survivors, 54% were male, 66% were non-Hispanic White, and 36% had leukemia. At survey participation, survivors were an average age (± standard deviation) of 16.3 ± 4.7 years and 32.8 ± 14.7 months off therapy. Lack of provider HPV vaccine recommendation was reported by 73% (95% CI, 70% to 75%) of survivors. For the entire cohort, patient-level factors associated with lack of reported provider recommendation included perceived lack of insurance coverage for the HPV vaccine (odds ratio [OR], 4.0; 95% CI, 2.7 to 5.9; P < .001), male sex (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.9 to 4.0; P < .001), and decreased parent-survivor communication regarding HPV vaccination (OR, 1.7 per unit decrease in score; 95% CI, 1.3 to 2.2; P < .001). In the sex- and age-stratified models, perceived lack of insurance coverage (all models) and male sex (age-stratified models) were also significantly associated with lack of reported provider recommendation.ConclusionWe identified factors characterizing survivors at risk for not reporting receipt of a health care provider HPV vaccine recommendation. Future research is needed to develop interventions that facilitate effective provider recommendations for HPV vaccination among all young cancer survivors.

Dataset Information

Health Care Provider Factors Associated with Patient-Reported Adverse Events and Harm.

Publications

Health Care Provider Factors Associated with Patient-Reported Adverse Events and Harm.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets