Search

Objectives: The aims of this study were to investigate the demographics, causes, and contributing factors of retained guidewires (GWs) and to make specific recommendations for their prevention., Methods: The Veterans Administration patient safety reporting system database for 2000-2016 was queried for cases of retained GWs (RGWs). Data extracted for each case included procedure location, provider experience, insertion site, urgency, time to discovery, root causes, and corrective actions taken., Results: There were 101 evaluable cases of RGWs. Resident trainee (36%), critical care unit (38%), femoral vein (44%), and nonemergent placement (79%) were the conditions most frequently associated with a RGW. While discovery occurred almost immediately (30%) or in next 24 hours (31%), there were instances of RGWs found months (2%) or years (3%) later. Common root causes included inexperience (46%), lack of standardization (35%), distractions (25%), and lack of a checklist (23%)., Conclusions: The results demonstrate the result of human factors-based errors such as posttask completion errors. We recommend human factor-based interventions such as checklists and devices employing forcing functions that do not allow clinicians to complete the insertion process without first removing the GW., Competing Interests: The authors disclose no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study describes reported adverse events related to gastrointestinal (GI) scope and tube placement procedures (between January 2010 and June 2012), in the Veterans Health Administration. Adverse events, including those related to GI procedures resulting in preventable harm, continue to occur., Methods: This is a descriptive review of root cause analysis reports of GI scope and tube placement procedures from the National Center for Patient Safety database. Adverse event type, procedure, location, severity, and frequency were extracted. Spearman ρ was used to determine associations between types of adverse events and harm levels., Results: We reviewed 27 cases of reported adverse events related to GI invasive procedures. Of the adverse events for which we could determine location (n = 25), 10 (40%) were in the operating room and 15 (60%) occurred in a nonoperating room. Endoscopies were associated with the least amount of harm. The most frequently reported adverse event types were human factors (22.22%, n = 6) and retained items (18.52%, n = 5). Retained item events were associated with the most harm. The most common root causes were lack of standardization in the process of care and suboptimal communication., Conclusions: Retained items after invasive procedures and human factors errors were the most common and harmful type of adverse event in this study. Efforts to reduce adverse events during GI invasive procedures include improving situational awareness of the risk of retained items, standardization of care, communication between providers, and inspection of instruments for intactness before and after procedures.

This quality improvement project describes 22 OR patient falls reported in the Veterans Health Administration between January 2010 and February 2016. Most (n = 15; 68%) involved patient falls from the OR bed. Other patient falls (n = 6; 27%) occurred when the patient was transferred to or from the OR bed, and one fall (5%) occurred at another time. Root causes of the falls included tilting of the OR bed, issues with safety restraints, malfunctioning OR bed or gurney locks, inadequate patient sedation, and poor communication among team members. One fall (5%) resulted in a major injury, four falls (18%) resulted in minor injuries, six falls resulted in no injury, and 11 falls (50%) had no reported outcome. Falls in the OR, although rare, can be injurious. We drafted recommendations based on the root causes that include specific guidance on communication, teamwork, best practices, restraints and equipment, and training., (© AORN, Inc, 2018.)

Background: Anesthesia providers have long been pioneers in patient safety. Despite remarkable efforts, anesthesia errors still occur, resulting in complications, injuries, and even death. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) National Center of Patient Safety uses root cause analysis (RCA) to examine why system-related adverse events occur and how to prevent future similar events. This study describes the types of anesthesia adverse events reported in VHA hospitals and their root causes and preventative actions., Methods: RCA reports from VHA hospitals from May 30, 2012, to May 1, 2015, were reviewed for root causes, severity of patient outcomes, and actions. These elements were coded by consensus and analyzed using descriptive statistics., Results: During the study period, 3228 RCAs were submitted, of which 292 involved an anesthesia provider. Thirty-six of these were specific to anesthesia care. We reviewed these 36 RCA reports of adverse events specific to anesthesia care. Types of event included medication errors (28%, 10), regional blocks (14%, 5), airway management (14%, 5), skin integrity or position (11%, 4), other (11%, 4), consent issues (8%, 3), equipment (8%, 3), and intravenous access and anesthesia awareness (3%, 1 each). Of the 36 anesthesia events reported, 5 (14%) were identified as being catastrophic, 10 (28%) major, 12 (34%) moderate, and 9 (26%) minor. The majority of root causes identified a need for improved standardization of processes., Conclusions: This analysis points to the need for systemwide implementation of human factors engineering-based approaches to work toward further eliminating anesthesia-related adverse events. Such actions include standardization of processes, forcing functions, separating storage of look-alike sound-alike medications, limiting stock of high-risk medication strengths, bar coding medications, use of cognitive aids such as checklists, and high-fidelity simulation.

Importance: Despite the recognized value of the Joint Commission's Universal Protocol and the implementation of time-outs, incorrect surgical procedures are still among the most common types of sentinel events and can have fatal consequences., Objectives: To examine a root cause analysis database for reported wrong-side thoracenteses and to determine the contributing factors associated with their occurrence., Design, Setting, and Participants: We searched the National Center for Patient Safety database for wrong-side thoracenteses performed in ambulatory clinics and hospital units other than the operating room reported from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2011., Main Outcomes and Measures: Data extracted included patient factors, clinical features, team structure and function, adherence to bottom-line patient safety measures, complications, and outcomes., Results: Fourteen cases of wrong-side thoracenteses are identified. Contributing factors included failure to perform a time-out (n=12), missing indication of laterality on the patient's consent form (n=10), absence of a site mark on the patient's skin within the sterile field (n=12), and absent verification of medical images (n=7). Complications included pneumothoraces (n=4), hemorrhage (n=3), and death directly attributable to the wrong-side thoracentesis (n=2). Teamwork and communication failure, unawareness of existing policy, and a deficit in training and education were the most common root causes of wrong-side thoracentesis., Conclusions and Relevance: Prevention of wrong-site procedures and accompanying patient harm outside the operating room requires adherence to the Universal Protocol and time-outs, effective teamwork, training and education, mentoring, and patient assessment for early detection of complications. The time-outs provide protected time and place for error detection and recovery.

Delays in diagnosis and treatment are widely considered to be threats to outpatient safety. However, few studies have identified and described what factors contribute to delays that might result in patient harm in the outpatient setting. We analyzed 111 root cause analysis reports that investigated such delays and were submitted to the Veterans Affairs National Center for Patient Safety in the period 2005-12. The most common contributing factors noted in the reports included coordination problems resulting from inadequate follow-up planning, delayed scheduling for unspecified reasons, inadequate tracking of test results, and the absence of a system to track patients in need of short-term follow-up. Other contributing factors were team-level decision-making problems resulting from miscommunication of urgency between providers and providers' lack of awareness of or knowledge about a patient's situation; and communication failures among providers, patients, and other health care team members. Our findings suggest that to support care goals in the Affordable Care Act and the National Quality Strategy, even relatively sophisticated electronic health record systems will require enhancements. At the same time, policy initiatives should support programs to implement, and perhaps reward the use of, more rigorous interprofessional teamwork principles to improve outpatient communication and coordination.