Search

The correlation between simulator-based medical performance and real-world behavior remains unclear. This study explored whether the effects of extended work hours on clinical performance, as reported in prior hospital-based studies, could be observed in a simulator-based testing environment.Intern volunteers reported to the simulator laboratory in a rested state and again in a sleep-deprived state (after a traditional 24- to 30-hour overnight shift [n=17]). A subset also presented after a shortened overnight shift (16 scheduled hours [n=8]). During each laboratory visit, participants managed two critically ill patients. An on-site physician scored each case, as did a blinded rater later watching videotapes of the performances (score=1 [worst] to 8 [best]; average of both cases=session score).Among all participants, the average simulator session score was 6.0 (95% CI: 5.6-6.4) in the rested state and declined to 5.0 (95% CI: 4.6-5.4) after the traditional overnight shift (P.001). Among those who completed the shortened overnight shift, the average postshift simulator session score was 5.8 (95% CI: 5.0-6.6) compared with 4.3 (95% CI: 3.8-4.9) after a traditional extended shift (P.001).In a clinical simulation test, medical interns performed significantly better after working a shortened overnight shift compared with a traditional extended shift. These findings are consistent with real-time hospital studies using the same shift schedule. Such an independent correlation not only confirms the detrimental impact of extended work hours on medical performance but also supports the validity of simulation as a clinical performance assessment tool.

Despite extensive documentation of risk to hospitalized patients (Kohn, Corrigan, and Donaldson 2000; Leape and Berwick 2005; Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 2009; Ornstein 2007;) and substantial efforts to improve in-hospital patient safety (Milstein et al. 2000; Berwick et al. 2006; Catalano 2006; McCannon, Hackbarth, and Griffin 2007; Vemula, Robyn Assaf, and Al-Assaf 2007; Jha et al. 2008), progress in this area has been slow (Leape and Berwick 2005; Vincent et al. 2008;). Indeed, recent studies suggest that adverse events due to hospital care remain common (Rozich, Haraden, and Resar 2003; Resar et al. 2006; Sharek et al. 2006; Griffin and Classen 2008; Takata et al. 2008;). Assessment of the impact of large-scale patient safety initiatives requires generally accepted, rigorous, standardized, and practical measures of adverse events (Leape and Berwick 2005; Vincent et al. 2008;). Such measures are also necessary for individual hospitals to assess their own adverse event rates, as well as the results of their improvement efforts. A number of approaches to measuring adverse event rates have been used historically, including voluntary reports (“incident reports”), mining of administrative databases, and the two-stage review process used in the Harvard Medical Practice Study (Brennan, Localio, and Laird 1989; Brennan et al. 1991; Thomas et al. 2002; Sharek and Classen 2006;). Each of these methods has limitations. The “trigger tool” approach to measuring adverse event rates, by guiding chart reviewers to specific times and events during a patient's hospitalization more likely to contain an adverse event, appears to provide a more efficient and focused variation on retrospective chart reviews and may overcome many of these limitations (Rozich, Haraden, and Resar 2003; Resar et al. 2006; Sharek and Classen 2006; Sharek et al. 2006; Griffin and Classen 2008; Takata et al. 2008; Office of the Inspector General March 2010;). Abnormal laboratory results, prescriptions for antidote medications, and other medical record-based “hints” can all serve to “trigger” the suggestion that an adverse event might have occurred, and that a more thorough review of the medical record is indicated. The Institute for Healthcare Improvement's (IHI's) Global Trigger Tool (GTT) is a single, comprehensive, operationalized, and well-described tool (Table 1; Griffin and Resar 2007) currently used by a number of hospitals in the United States and abroad (Classen et al. 2008) for executive and medical leadership to determine the level of safety in their organization and if improvement has occurred over time. We have performed the current study to provide further data on the performance characteristics, practicality, and generalizability of the GTT to evaluate its potential for tracking adverse events rates at institutional, as well as regional and national levels. This study adds to the present trigger tool literature by tracking adverse events over a 6-year time span, involving a large random sample of eligible patients hospitalized in North Carolina, and comparing hospital-based versus externally hired chart review teams. Table 1 Triggers Included in the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Global Trigger Tool The current report presents the results of a study of the GTT in a representative stratified random sample of 10 hospitals in North Carolina. This study had two principal aims: (1) to determine the performance characteristics (including reliability, sensitivity, and specificity) of the GTT and (2) to compare the medical record abstraction performance of internal hospital-selected reviewers with similarly trained external reviewers selected and supervised by a contract research organization (CRO).

SEVEN YEARS HAVE PASSED SINCE THE ACCREDITATION COUNCIL FOR GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION (ACGME) ESTABLISHED DUTY HOUR LIMITS for physicians-in-training. Prior to that time, few high quality studies existed regarding the effects on safety of residents' traditional work schedules.1,2 In the past few years, however, a growing body of literature has emerged regarding the hazards of prolonged sleep deprivation and of one particular aspect of residents' traditional schedules: the extended duty (> 16 h) shift.3–10 Data on extended shifts have previously prompted calls for action from the federal government and professional organizations.11–14 Last year, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) published a comprehensive report on resident duty hours,15 in which it recommended that residents should work no more than 16 consecutive hours without sleep. This recommendation has been the subject of considerable controversy. While numerous studies demonstrate the adverse consequences of sleep deprivation in industrial and laboratory settings,15 critics have suggested that insufficient data have been generated from clinical intervention studies to support the call for a change in traditional resident scheduling practices.16 Concerns raised include both the potential for “unintended consequences” of reducing work hours on patient safety—due to concerns about inadequate handovers of care—as well as the effects of work hour reduction on resident education. In addition, data have emerged suggesting that implementation of the IOM's recommendations could cost up to $1.6 billion dollars, while yielding uncertain benefits.17 The ACGME is currently reviewing the IOM recommendations to determine whether to make changes to current duty hour standards.18 Remarkably, in the face of international reductions in resident-physicians' extended shifts and calls for change in the U.S., there has not been a systematic evaluation of the IOM's key recommendation regarding extended shifts. Prior systematic reviews have been conducted of the relationship between resident sleep deprivation and performance,1,2,10 but the intent of these prior reviews was to not to assess the effects of specific interventions, or to rate the evidentiary strength of the studies conducted. We therefore conducted a systematic review with the specific aim of determining whether safety, education, and quality of life have improved or deteriorated in programs that have reduced or eliminated shifts > 16 h, and to assess the quality of included studies using the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force methodology.

OBJECTIVE: The goal was to examine pediatric hospitalist rounding practices and characteristics associated with programs conducting family-centered rounds (FCRs). METHODS: The Pediatric Hospitalist Triennial Survey, sent to a subset of pediatric hospitalists on the Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings listserv from the United States and Canada, consisted of 63 questions on sociodemographic characteristics, training, practice characteristics, and rounding practices. RESULTS: Among 265 respondents (response rate: 70%), 78% practiced in academic hospitals and 22% in nonacademic hospitals. The prevalences of specific rounding categories were as follows: FCRs, 44%; sit-down, 24%; hallway, 21%; others, 11%. FCRs occurred significantly more often in academic (48%) than nonacademic (31%) hospitals (P = .04). FCRs can include pediatric residents, bedside nurses, charge nurses, case managers, pharmacists, and social workers. Academic settings and higher average daily patient censuses, but not FCRs, were significantly associated with prolonged rounding duration. The most commonly perceived FCR benefits included increased family involvement and understanding, trainee role modeling, and effective team communication. Physical constraints, trainees' apprehensions, and time were the main perceived FCR barriers. Greater perceived benefit/barrier ratios, FCR benefits, and family involvement in care were associated with a greater likelihood of conducting FCRs, whereas a greater number of perceived FCR barriers was associated with not conducting FCRs. CONCLUSIONS: FCRs were the most-common rounding category among respondents. FCRs were not associated with a self-reported increase in rounding duration. Successful FCR implementation may require educating staff members and trainees about FCR benefits and addressing FCR barriers.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric housestaff are required to learn basic procedural skills and demonstrate competence during training. To our knowledge, an evidenced-based procedural skills curriculum does not exist. OBJECTIVE: To create, implement, and evaluate a modular procedural skills curriculum for pediatric residents. METHODS: A randomized, controlled trial was performed. Thirty-eight interns in the Boston Combined Residency Program who began their training in 2005 were enrolled and randomly assigned. Modules were created to teach residents bag-mask ventilation, venipuncture, peripheral intravenous catheter (PIV) insertion, and lumbar puncture skills. The curriculum was administered to participants in the intervention group during intern orientation. Interns in the control group learned procedural skills by usual methods. Subjects were evaluated by using a structured objective assessment on simulators immediately after the intervention and 7 months later. Success in performing live-patient procedures was self-reported by subjects. The primary outcome was successful performance of the procedure on the initial assessment. Secondary outcomes included checklist and knowledge examination scores, live-patient success, and qualitative assessment of the curriculum. RESULTS: Participants in the intervention group performed PIV placement more successfully than controls (79% vs 35%) and scored significantly higher on the checklist for PIV placement (81% vs 61%) and lumbar puncture (77% vs 68%) at the initial assessment. There were no differences between groups at month 7, and both groups demonstrated declining skills. There were no statistically significant differences in success on live-patient procedures. Those in the intervention group scored significantly higher on knowledge examinations. CONCLUSIONS: Participants in the intervention group were more successful performing certain simulated procedures than controls when tested immediately after receiving the curriculum but demonstrated declining skills thereafter. Future efforts must emphasize retraining, and residents must have sufficient opportunities to practice skills learned in a formal curriculum.

Background: There are currently no field data about the effect of implementing European Working Time Directive (EWTD)-compliant rotas in a medical setting. Surveys of doctors’ subjective opinions on shift work have not provided reliable objective data with which to evaluate its efficacy. \ud \ud Aim: We therefore studied the effects on patient's safety and doctors’ work-sleep patterns of implementing an EWTD-compliant 48 h work week in a single-blind intervention study carried out over a 12-week period at the University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust. We hypothesized that medical error rates would be reduced following the new rota. \ud \ud Methods: Nineteen junior doctors, nine studied while working an intervention schedule of

OBJECTIVE. To mitigate the risks of fatigue-related medical errors, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education introduced work hour limits for resident physicians in 2003. Our goal was to determine whether work hours, sleep, and safety changed after implementation of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education standards. METHODS. We conducted a prospective cohort study in which residents from 3 large pediatric training programs provided daily reports of work hours and sleep. In addition, they completed reports of near-miss and actual motor vehicle crashes, occupational exposures, self-reported medical errors, and ratings of educational experience. They were screened for depression and burnout. Concurrently, at 2 of the centers, data on medication errors were collected prospectively by using an established active surveillance method. RESULTS. A total of 220 residents provided 6007 daily reports of their work hours and sleep, and 16 158 medication orders were reviewed. Although scheduling changes were made in each program to accommodate the standards, 24- to 30-hour shifts remained common, and the frequency of residents’ call remained largely unchanged. There was no change in residents’ measured total work hours or sleep hours. There was no change in the overall rate of medication errors, and there was a borderline increase in the rate of resident physician ordering errors, from 1.06 to 1.38 errors per 100 patient-days. Rates of motor vehicle crashes, occupational exposures, depression, and self-reported medical errors and overall ratings of work and educational experiences did not change. The mean length of extended-duration (on-call) shifts decreased 2.7% to 28.5 hours, and rates of resident burnout decreased significantly (from 75.4% to 57.0%). CONCLUSIONS. Total hours of work and sleep did not change after implementation of the duty hour standards. Although fewer residents were burned out, rates of medication errors, resident depression, and resident injuries and educational ratings did not improve.

Article-at-a-Glance Background There has been increasing interest in the impact of resident-physician and nurse work hours on patient safety. The evidence demonstrates that work schedules have a profound effect on providers' sleep and performance, as well as on their safety and that of their patients. Nurses working shifts greater than 12.5hours are at significantly increased risk of experiencing decreased vigilance on the job, suffering an occupational injury, or making a medical error. Physicians-in-training working traditional > 24-hour on-call shifts are at greatly increased risk of experiencing an occupational sharps injury or a motor vehicle crash on the drive home from work and of making a serious or even fatal medical error. As compared to when working 16-hours shifts, on-call residents have twice as many attentional failures when working overnight and commit 36% more serious medical errors. They also report making 300% more fatigue-related medical errors that lead to a patient's death. Conclusion The weight of evidence strongly suggests that extended-duration work shifts significantly increase fatigue and impair performance and safety. From the standpoint of both providers and patients, the hours routinely worked by health care providers in the United States are unsafe. To reduce the unacceptably high rate of preventable fatigue-related medical error and injuries among health care workers, the United States must establish and enforce safe work-hour limits.

OBJECTIVE. The objective of this study was to assess the opinions of pediatric program directors regarding procedural skills training of pediatric residents.METHODS. We developed a survey based on the Residency Review Committee's guidelines for procedural training. It included items about the importance of 29 procedures encountered in pediatric training, estimates of residents' competence in performing them, and the teaching of procedural skills. The survey was sent to members of the Association of Pediatric Program Directors. The primary outcome was the perceived importance for residents to achieve competence in these procedures, rated on a 10-point Likert scale. Secondary outcomes included perception of resident competence to perform procedures and educational methods used by respondents for teaching procedural skills. Associations between demographic characteristics and perceived importance or competence were also assessed.RESULTS. Surveys were sent to 139 programs, and 112 responded. Thirteen procedures were rated 8 or higher by >75% of program directors. Seven skills that were prioritized by the Residency Review Committee did not achieve this level of consensus. Respondents reported that many residents failed to achieve competence by the end of training in 9 of 13 procedures that they rated as very important, including venipuncture, neonatal intubation, and administering injections. Residents who perform the majority of venipunctures and intravenous catheter placements at their institutions were more likely to be judged competent in performing these skills than residents who do not.CONCLUSIONS. The Residency Review Committee's list of procedures does not necessarily reflect the opinions of pediatric program directors on the most essential skills for trainees. Many residents may not develop competence in several important procedures by the end of residency, most notably vascular access and life-saving skills. A more robust and standardized method is needed for teaching procedural skills and for documenting competence.

OBJECTIVE. This study examined mechanisms of efficiency in a managed care hospitalist system on length of stay and total costs for common pediatric conditions. PATIENTS AND METHODS. We conducted a retrospective cohort study (October 1993 to July 1998) of patients in a not-for-profit staff model (HMO 1) and a non–staff-model (HMO 2) managed care organization at a freestanding children's hospital. HMO 1 introduced a hospitalist system for patients in October 1996. Patients were included if they had 1 of 3 common diagnoses: asthma, dehydration, or viral illness. Linear regression models examining length-of-stay–specific costs for prehospitalist and posthospitalist systems were built. Distribution of length of stay for each diagnosis before and after the system change in both study groups was calculated. Interrupted time series analysis tested whether changes in the trends of length of stay and total costs occurred after implementation of the hospitalist system by HMO1 (HMO 2 as comparison group) for all 3 diagnoses combined. RESULTS. A total of 1970 patients with 1 of the 3 study conditions were cared for in HMO 1, and 1001 in HMO 2. After the hospitalist system was introduced in HMO 1, length of stay was reduced by 0.23 days (13%) for asthma and 0.19 days (11%) for dehydration; there was no difference for patients with viral illness. The largest relative reduction in length of stay occurred in patients with a shorter length of stay whose hospitalizations were reduced from 2 days to 1 day. This shift resulted in an average cost-per-case reduction of $105.51 (9.3%) for patients with asthma and $86.22 (7.8%) for patients with dehydration. During the same period, length of stay and total cost rose in HMO 2. CONCLUSIONS. Introduction of a hospitalist system in one health maintenance organization resulted in earlier discharges and reduced costs for children with asthma and dehydration compared with another one, with the largest reductions occurring in reducing some 2-day hospitalizations to 1 day. These findings suggest that hospitalists can increase efficiency and reduce costs for children with common pediatric conditions.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:Night teams of hospital providers have become more common in the wake of resident physician duty hour changes. We sought to examine relationships between nighttime communication and parents’ inpatient experience.METHODS:We conducted a prospective cohort study of parents (n = 471) of pediatric inpatients (0–17 years) from May 2013 to October 2014. Parents rated their overall experience, understanding of the medical plan, quality of nighttime doctors’ and nurses’ communication with them, and quality of nighttime communication between doctors and nurses. We tested the reliability of each of these 5 constructs (Cronbach’s α for each >.8). Using logistic regression models, we examined rates and predictors of top-rated hospital experience.RESULTS:Parents completed 398 surveys (84.5% response rate). A total of 42.5% of parents reported a top overall experience construct score. On multivariable analysis, top-rated overall experience scores were associated with higher scores for communication and experience with nighttime doctors (odds ratio [OR] 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–3.08), for communication and experience with nighttime nurses (OR 6.47; 95% CI, 2.88–14.54), and for nighttime doctor–nurse interaction (OR 2.66; 95% CI, 1.26–5.64) (P < .05 for each). Parents provided the highest percentage of top ratings for the individual item pertaining to whether nurses listened to their concerns (70.5% strongly agreed) and the lowest such ratings for regular communication with nighttime doctors (31.4% excellent).CONCLUSIONS:Parent communication with nighttime providers and parents’ perceptions of communication and teamwork between these providers may be important drivers of parent experience. As hospitals seek to improve the patient-centeredness of care, improving nighttime communication and teamwork will be valuable to explore.

Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) provide a framework to standardize medical education outcomes and advance competency-based assessment. Direct observation of performance plays a central role in entrustment decisions; however, data obtained from these observations are often insufficient to draw valid high-stakes conclusions. One approach to enhancing the reliability and validity of these assessments is to create videos that establish performance standards to train faculty observers. Little is known about how to create videos that can serve as standards for assessment of EPAs.The authors report their experience developing videos that represent five levels of performance for an EPA for patient handoffs. The authors describe a process that begins with mapping the EPA to the critical competencies needed to make an entrustment decision. Each competency is then defined by five milestones (behavioral descriptors of performance at five advancing levels). Integration of the milestones at each level across competencies enabled the creation of clinical vignettes that were converted into video scripts and ultimately videos. Each video represented a performance standard from novice to expert. The process included multiple assessments by experts to guide iterative improvements, provide evidence of content validity, and ensure that the authors successfully translated behavioral descriptions and vignettes into videos that represented the intended performance level for a learner. The steps outlined are generalizable to other EPAs, serving as a guide for others to develop videos to train faculty. This process provides the level of content validity evidence necessary to support using videos as standards for high-stakes entrustment decisions.

OBJECTIVES: An efficient and reliable process for measuring harm due to medical care is needed to advance pediatric patient safety. Several pediatric studies have assessed the use of trigger tools in varying inpatient environments. Using the Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s adult-focused Global Trigger Tool as a model, we developed and pilot tested a trigger tool that would identify the most common causes of harm in pediatric inpatient environments. METHODS: After formal training, 6 academic children’s hospitals used this novel pediatric trigger tool to review 100 randomly selected inpatient records per site from patients discharged during the month of February 2012. RESULTS: From the 600 patient charts evaluated, 240 harmful events (“harms”) were identified, resulting in a rate of 40 harms per 100 patients admitted and 54.9 harms per 1000 patient days across the 6 hospitals. At least 1 harm was identified in 146 patients (24.3% of patients). Of the 240 total events, 108 (45.0%) were assessed to have been potentially or definitely preventable. The most common patient harms were intravenous catheter infiltrations/burns, respiratory distress, constipation, pain, and surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with earlier rates of all-cause harm in adult hospitals, harm occurs at high rates in hospitalized children. Availability and use of an all-cause harm identification tool will establish the epidemiology of harm and will provide a consistent approach to assessing the effect of interventions on harms in hospitalized children.

Considerable controversy exists regarding optimal work hours for physicians and surgeons in training. In a series of studies, we assessed the effect of extended work hours on resident sleep and health as well as patient safety. In a validated nationwide survey, we found that residents who had worked 24 hours or longer were 2.3 times more likely to have a motor vehicle crash following that shift than when they worked24 hours, and that the monthly risk of a crash increased by 16.2% after each extended duration shift. We also found in a randomized trial that interns working a traditional on-call schedule slept 5.8 hours less per week, had twice as many attentional failures on duty overnight, and made 36% more serious medical errors and nearly six times more serious diagnostic errors than when working on a schedule that limited continuous duty to 16 hours. While numerous opinions have been published opposing reductions in extended work hours due to concerns regarding continuity of patient care, reduced educational opportunities, and traditionally-defined professionalism, there are remarkably few objective data in support of continuing to schedule medical trainees to work shifts24 hours. An evidence-based approach is needed to minimize the well-documented risk that current work hour practices confer on resident health and patient safety while optimizing education and continuity of care.

BACKGROUND. Systematic reviews have demonstrated consistently decreased length of stay and costs in internal medicine hospitalist systems. Systematic reviews of pediatric hospitalist systems have not been conducted. OBJECTIVE. Our aim was to determine the effects of pediatric hospitalist systems on length of stay, costs, quality of care, and provider satisfaction and experience. METHODS. We searched PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library databases, and the Pediatric Academic Societies National Meeting research abstracts for all primary-data studies published or presented on pediatric hospitalist systems. Studies presenting primary data on efficiency, financial performance, clinical outcomes, or family, referring provider, and housestaff experience in hospitalist systems were included; review articles and case studies were excluded. To minimize publication bias, we contacted all primary authors to obtain information about unpublished studies. RESULTS. Of 47 publications reviewed, 20 were primary-data studies that met criteria for inclusion. Six of 7 studies that compared traditional and hospitalist systems of care demonstrated improvements in costs and/or length of stay in pediatric hospitalist systems. The average decrease in cost was 10%; average decrease in length of stay was 10%. Three of 3 economic analyses, however, demonstrate that efficiency gains do not generally translate into revenues for the hospitalist programs themselves; most hospitalist programs are currently losing money. Surveys of families, referring providers, and pediatric residents demonstrate neutral or improved experiences in hospitalist systems, although these data are less comprehensive. Data on quality of care are insufficient to draw conclusions. CONCLUSIONS. Emerging research suggests that pediatric hospitalist systems decrease hospital costs and length of stay without adversely affecting provider, parent, or housestaff experiences. The quality of care in pediatric hospitalist systems is unclear, because rigorous metrics to evaluate quality are lacking. Studies of the processes and outcomes of hospital care are needed.

OBJECTIVES. To summarize a meeting of academic pediatric hospitalists and to describe the current state of the field. METHODS. The Ambulatory Pediatric Association sponsored a meeting for academic pediatric hospitalists in November 2003. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss and to define roles of academic pediatric hospitalists, including their roles as clinicians, educators, and researchers, and to discuss organizational issues and unique hospitalist issues within general academic pediatrics. Workshops were held in the areas of organization and administration, academic life, research, and education. A literature review was also conducted in the areas discussed. RESULTS. More than 130 physicians attended. Thirteen workshops were held, and all information was summarized in large-group sessions for all attendees. CONCLUSIONS. Pediatric hospital medicine is a rapidly growing field, with an estimated 800 to 1000 pediatric hospitalists currently practicing. Initial work has defined the clinical environment and has begun to stake out a unique knowledge and skill set. The Pediatric Hospitalists in Academic Settings conference demonstrated the audience for additional development and the resources to move forward.

Article-at-a-Glance Background Safety initiatives have primarily focused on physicians despite the fact that nurses provide the majority of direct inpatient care. Patient surveillance and preventing errors from harming patients represent essential nursing responsibilities but have received relatively little study. Methods The study was conducted between July 2003 and July 2004 in a 10-bed academic coronary care unit. Direct observation of nursing care and solicited and institutional incident reports were used to find potential incidents. Two physician reviewers rated incidents as to the presence, preventability, and potential severity of harm of errors and associated factors. Results Overall data were collected for 147 days, including 150hours of direct observation. One hundred forty-two recovered medical errors were found, including 61% (86/142) during direct observations. Most errors (69%; 98/142) were intercepted before reaching the patients. Errors that reached patients included 13% that were mitigated before resulting in harm and 18% that were ameliorated before more severe harm could occur. Discussion Protecting patients from the potentially dangerous consequences of medical errors is one of the many ways critical care nurses improve patient safety. Interventions designed to increase the ability of nurses to recover and promptly report errors have the potential to improve patient outcomes.

Objective. To determine the incidence of preventable adverse events (AEs) and near misses (NMs) among infants hospitalized for bronchiolitis at a pediatric tertiary care hospital and the impact of these errors on hospital length of stay (LOS).Methods. We studied 143 infants with bronchiolitis, ages 0 to 12 months, admitted from December 2002 to April 2003. Using prospective chart review and staff reports, we captured medical errors and AEs. Each event was classified as a (1) preventable AE, (2) nonpreventable AE, (3) intercepted NM, (4) nonintercepted NM, or (5) error with little or no potential for harm.Results. Of 143 patients, 15 (10%) suffered an AE or NM. The incidence of preventable AEs was 10 per 100 admissions. We found a higher incidence of preventable AEs and NMs among critically ill patients (CIPs) compared with non-CIPs (68 vs 5 per 100 admissions, respectively), making the absolute risk of an AE or NM 14 times more likely in CIPs. Mean LOS was significantly longer for CIPs with at least 1 AE (9.1 ± 8.8 days) than for CIPs without AEs (2.9 ± 1.5 days). Mean LOS was not significantly different between non-CIPs who did (3.8 ± 2.6 days) and did not (4.2 ± 5.0 days) experience an AE.Conclusions. Preventable AEs occur frequently among patients admitted for bronchiolitis, especially those who are critically ill. CIPs who suffer AEs during their hospitalization have longer hospital LOSs. Future studies should investigate error-prevention strategies with a focus on those patients with severe disease.

background Although sleep deprivation has been shown to impair neurobehavioral performance, few studies have measured its effects on medical errors. methods We conducted a prospective, randomized study comparing the rates of serious medical errors made by interns while they were working according to a traditional schedule with extended (24 hours or more) work shifts every other shift (an “every third night” call schedule) and while they were working according to an intervention schedule that eliminated extended work shifts and reduced the number of hours worked per week. Incidents were identified by means of a multidisciplinary, four-pronged approach that included direct, continuous observation. Two physicians who were unaware of the interns’ schedule assignments independently rated each incident. results During a total of 2203 patient-days involving 634 admissions, interns made 35.9 percent more serious medical errors during the traditional schedule than during the intervention schedule (136.0 vs. 100.1 per 1000 patient-days, P

Background Handoff miscommunications are a leading source of medical errors. Error rates decreased following implementation of the I-PASS handoff program (a bundled intervention using a structured mnemonic, I-PASS, and other initiatives to sustain implementation) in a pediatric research trial. Whether I-PASS can be implemented in settings outside academic pediatric institutions is unknown. Objectives To implement I-PASS in a variety of hospitals and medical specialties using a mentored process. (2) To measure the association of I-PASS implementation with handoff quality and provider-reported medical error rates. Methods We implemented I-PASS in 16 hospitals [community (n=5), academic (n=11)] and multiple specialties [internal medicine (n=7), pediatrics (n=3), other (n=6)]. We paired each site with an external mentorship team of I-PASS experts that conducted a site visit and provided ongoing coaching. Site leads participated in program wide webinars and shared data with participating sites. Validated handoff observation tools and a provider survey assessed handoff quality and rates of adverse events. Results Implementation was associated with increased inclusion of all 5 I-PASS mnemonic elements for both verbal (14% vs 70%) and written (0% vs 81%) handoffs. Additionally, increases were noted in the frequency of high quality verbal (44% vs 81%) and written (49% vs 73%) patient summaries, verbal (22% vs 82%) and written (44% vs 72%) contingency plans, and verbal receiver syntheses (4% vs 81%). Adverse events decreased by 27%. All changes statistically significant. Improvements were similar across provider types and settings. Conclusions The I-PASS Handoff program is associated with improved handoff communication in a variety of settings and provider types.

Objectives. Medication errors in pediatric inpatients occur at similar rates as in adults but have 3 times the potential to cause harm. Error prevention strategies in this setting remain largely untested. The objective of this study was to classify the major types of medication errors in pediatric inpatients and to determine which strategies might most effectively prevent them.Methods. A prospective cohort study was conducted of 1020 patients who were admitted to 2 academic medical centers during a 6-week period in April and May 1999. Medication errors were characterized by subtype. Physician raters evaluated error prevention strategies and identified those that might be most effective in preventing errors.Results. Of 10 778 medication orders reviewed, 616 contained errors. Of these, 120 (19.5%) were classified as potentially harmful, including 115 potential adverse drug events (18.7%) and 5 preventable adverse drug events (0.8%). Most errors occurred at the ordering stage (74%) and involved errors in dosing (28%), route (18%), or frequency (9%). Three interventions might have prevented most potentially harmful errors: 1) computerized physician order entry with clinical decision support systems (76%); 2) ward-based clinical pharmacists (81%); and 3) improved communication among physicians, nurses, and pharmacists (86%). Interrater reliability of error prevention strategy assignment was good (agreement: 0.92; κ: 0.82).Conclusions. Of the assessed interventions, computerized physician order entry with clinical decision support systems; ward-based clinical pharmacists; and improved communication among physicians, nurses, and pharmacists had the greatest potential to reduce medication errors in pediatric inpatients. Development, implementation, and assessment of such interventions in the pediatric inpatient setting are needed.

Human activity has contributed to climate change. The relationship between climate and child health has not been well investigated. This review discusses the role of climate change on child health and suggests 3 ways in which this relationship may manifest. First, environmental changes associated with anthropogenic greenhouse gases can lead to respiratory diseases, sunburn, melanoma, and immunosuppression. Second, climate change may directly cause heat stroke, drowning, gastrointestinal diseases, and psychosocial maldevelopment. Third, ecologic alterations triggered by climate change can increase rates of malnutrition, allergies and exposure to mycotoxins, vector-borne diseases (malaria, dengue, encephalitides, Lyme disease), and emerging infectious diseases. Further climate change is likely, given global industrial and political realities. Proactive and preventive physician action, research focused on the differential effects of climate change on subpopulations including children, and policy advocacy on the individual and federal levels could contain climate change and inform appropriate prevention and response.

Context Few data exist on the relationships between experienced physicians' work hours and sleep, and patient safety. Objective To determine if sleep opportunities for attending surgeons and obstetricians/gynecologists are associated with the risk of complications. Design, setting, and patients Matched retrospective cohort study of procedures performed from January 1999 through June 2008 by attending physicians (86 surgeons and 134 obstetricians/gynecologists) who had been in the hospital performing another procedure involving adult patients for at least part of the preceding night (12 am-6 am, postnighttime procedures). Sleep opportunity was calculated as the time between end of the overnight procedure and start of the first procedure the following day. Matched control procedures included as many as 5 procedures of the same type performed by the same physician on days without preceding overnight procedures. Complications were identified and classified by a blinded 3-step process that included administrative screening, medical record reviews, and clinician ratings. Main outcome measures Rates of complications in postnighttime procedures as compared with controls; rates of complications in postnighttime procedures among physicians with more than 6-hour sleep opportunities vs those with sleep opportunities of 6 hours or less. Results A total of 919 surgical and 957 obstetrical postnighttime procedures were matched with 3552 and 3945 control procedures, respectively. Complications occurred in 101 postnighttime procedures (5.4%) and 365 control procedures (4.9%) (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84-1.41). Complications occurred in 82 of 1317 postnighttime procedures with sleep opportunities of 6 hours or less (6.2%) vs 19 of 559 postnighttime procedures with sleep opportunities of more than 6 hours (3.4%) (odds ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.02-2.89). Postnighttime procedures completed after working more than 12 hours (n = 958) compared with 12 hours or less (n = 918) had nonsignificantly higher complication rates (6.5% vs 4.3%; odds ratio, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.96-2.27). Conclusion Overall, procedures performed the day after attending physicians worked overnight were not associated with significantly increased complication rates, although there was an increased rate of complications among postnighttime surgical procedures performed by physicians with sleep opportunities of less than 6 hours.

Importance Medical errors and adverse events (AEs) are common among hospitalized children. While clinician reports are the foundation of operational hospital safety surveillance and a key component of multifaceted research surveillance, patient and family reports are not routinely gathered. We hypothesized that a novel family-reporting mechanism would improve incident detection. Objective To compare error and AE rates (1) gathered systematically with vs without family reporting, (2) reported by families vs clinicians, and (3) reported by families vs hospital incident reports. Design, Setting, and Participants We conducted a prospective cohort study including the parents/caregivers of 989 hospitalized patients 17 years and younger (total 3902 patient-days) and their clinicians from December 2014 to July 2015 in 4 US pediatric centers. Clinician abstractors identified potential errors and AEs by reviewing medical records, hospital incident reports, and clinician reports as well as weekly and discharge Family Safety Interviews (FSIs). Two physicians reviewed and independently categorized all incidents, rating severity and preventability (agreement, 68%-90%; κ, 0.50-0.68). Discordant categorizations were reconciled. Rates were generated using Poisson regression estimated via generalized estimating equations to account for repeated measures on the same patient. Main Outcomes and Measures Error and AE rates. Results Overall, 746 parents/caregivers consented for the study. Of these, 717 completed FSIs. Their median (interquartile range) age was 32.5 (26-40) years; 380 (53.0%) were nonwhite, 566 (78.9%) were female, 603 (84.1%) were English speaking, and 380 (53.0%) had attended college. Of 717 parents/caregivers completing FSIs, 185 (25.8%) reported a total of 255 incidents, which were classified as 132 safety concerns (51.8%), 102 nonsafety-related quality concerns (40.0%), and 21 other concerns (8.2%). These included 22 preventable AEs (8.6%), 17 nonharmful medical errors (6.7%), and 11 nonpreventable AEs (4.3%) on the study unit. In total, 179 errors and 113 AEs were identified from all sources. Family reports included 8 otherwise unidentified AEs, including 7 preventable AEs. Error rates with family reporting (45.9 per 1000 patient-days) were 1.2-fold (95% CI, 1.1-1.2) higher than rates without family reporting (39.7 per 1000 patient-days). Adverse event rates with family reporting (28.7 per 1000 patient-days) were 1.1-fold (95% CI, 1.0-1.2; P = .006) higher than rates without (26.1 per 1000 patient-days). Families and clinicians reported similar rates of errors (10.0 vs 12.8 per 1000 patient-days; relative rate, 0.8; 95% CI, .5-1.2) and AEs (8.5 vs 6.2 per 1000 patient-days; relative rate, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.8-2.2). Family-reported error rates were 5.0-fold (95% CI, 1.9-13.0) higher and AE rates 2.9-fold (95% CI, 1.2-6.7) higher than hospital incident report rates. Conclusions and Relevance Families provide unique information about hospital safety and should be included in hospital safety surveillance in order to facilitate better design and assessment of interventions to improve safety.

Handoffs of patient care are a leading root cause of medical errors. Standardized techniques exist to minimize miscommunications during verbal handoffs, but studies to guide standardization of printed handoff documents are lacking.To determine whether variability exists in the content of printed handoff documents and to identify key data elements that should be uniformly included in these documents.Pediatric hospitalist services at 9 institutions in the United States and Canada.Sample handoff documents from each institution were reviewed, and structured group interviews were conducted to understand each institution's priorities for written handoffs. An expert panel reviewed all handoff documents and structured group-interview findings, and subsequently made consensus-based recommendations for data elements that were either essential or recommended, including best overall printed handoff practices.Nine sites completed structured group interviews and submitted data. We identified substantial variation in both the structure and content of printed handoff documents. Only 4 of 23 possible data elements (17%) were uniformly present in all sites' handoff documents. The expert panel recommended the following as essential for all printed handoffs: assessment of illness severity, patient summary, action items, situation awareness and contingency plans, allergies, medications, age, weight, date of admission, and patient and hospital service identifiers. Code status and several other elements were also recommended.Wide variation exists in the content of printed handoff documents. Standardizing printed handoff documents has the potential to decrease omissions of key data during patient care transitions, which may decrease the risk of downstream medical errors.

The Medical Student Workshop is a companion piece to the Core Resident Workshop, as well as the other elements in the I-PASS Handoff Curriculum. Its curricular materials have been modified to meet the needs of a group of more novice learners during their introduction to clinical care. The workshop includes a 60-minute didactic and interactive session that is devoted to team training in structured communication techniques and to the teaching of a standardized approach to the handoff process, including the integration of verbal and written handoff components. Key structured team communication techniques and the I-PASS mnemonic are taught in detail and reinforced with the use of trigger videos and large group discussion. The final 30-minutes of the workshop are devoted to two handoff simulations exercises. The handoff simulation exercises feature interactive role plays in which participants (in groups of two or three) gain hands-on experience and practice the I-PASS handoff technique under the supervision of a faculty member or senior resident. Similar in content to the I-PASS Handoff Core Resident Workshop, this workshop has been tailored to fit the needs of medical students as novice clinicians with limited clinical experience and emerging medical knowledge. This curriculum was implemented for third- and fourth-year medical students during their inpatient pediatric rotations from June — December 2013 at six medical schools and pediatric hospitals across North America including: (1) University of Cincinnati College of Medicine/Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center; (2) UCSF School of Medicine/Benioff Children's Hospital; (3) University of Utah School of Medicine/Primary Children's Medical Center; (4) Drexel University College of Medicine/St. Christopher's Hospital for Children; (5) University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine/Hospital for Sick Children; and (6) Stanford University School of Medicine/Lucile Packard Children's Hospital.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patient handoffs in health care require transfer of information, responsibility, and authority between providers. Suboptimal patient handoffs pose a serious safety risk. Studies demonstrating the impact of improved patient handoffs on care failures are lacking. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of a multihospital collaborative designed to decrease handoff-related care failures. METHODS: Twenty-three children’s hospitals participated in a quality improvement collaborative aimed at reducing handoff-related care failures. The improvement was guided by evidence-based recommendations regarding handoff intent and content, standardized handoff tools/methods, and clear transition of responsibility. Hospitals tailored handoff elements to locally important handoff types. Handoff-related care failures were compared between baseline and 3 intervention periods. Secondary outcomes measured compliance to specific change package elements and balancing measure of staff satisfaction. RESULTS: Twenty-three children’s hospitals evaluated 7864 handoffs over the 12-month study period. Handoff-related care failures decreased from baseline (25.8%) to the final intervention period (7.9%) (P < .05). Significant improvement was observed in every handoff type studied. Compliance to change package elements improved (achieving a common understanding about the patient from 86% to 96% [P < .05]; clear transition of responsibility from 92% to 96% [P < .05]; and minimized interruptions and distractions from 84% to 90% [P < .05]) as did overall satisfaction with the handoff (from 55% to 70% [P < .05]). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a standardized evidence-based handoff process across 23 children’s hospitals resulted in a significant decrease in handoff-related care failures, observed over all handoff types. Compliance to critical components of the handoff process improved, as did provider satisfaction.

Handoff miscommunications are a leading cause of medical errors. Studies comprehensively assessing handoff improvement programs are lacking.To determine whether introduction of a multifaceted handoff program was associated with reduced rates of medical errors and preventable adverse events, fewer omissions of key data in written handoffs, improved verbal handoffs, and changes in resident-physician workflow.Prospective intervention study of 1255 patient admissions (642 before and 613 after the intervention) involving 84 resident physicians (42 before and 42 after the intervention) from July-September 2009 and November 2009-January 2010 on 2 inpatient units at Boston Children's Hospital.Resident handoff bundle, consisting of standardized communication and handoff training, a verbal mnemonic, and a new team handoff structure. On one unit, a computerized handoff tool linked to the electronic medical record was introduced.The primary outcomes were the rates of medical errors and preventable adverse events measured by daily systematic surveillance. The secondary outcomes were omissions in the printed handoff document and resident time-motion activity.Medical errors decreased from 33.8 per 100 admissions (95% CI, 27.3-40.3) to 18.3 per 100 admissions (95% CI, 14.7-21.9; P .001), and preventable adverse events decreased from 3.3 per 100 admissions (95% CI, 1.7-4.8) to 1.5 (95% CI, 0.51-2.4) per 100 admissions (P = .04) following the intervention. There were fewer omissions of key handoff elements on printed handoff documents, especially on the unit that received the computerized handoff tool (significant reductions of omissions in 11 of 14 categories with computerized tool; significant reductions in 2 of 14 categories without computerized tool). Physicians spent a greater percentage of time in a 24-hour period at the patient bedside after the intervention (8.3%; 95% CI 7.1%-9.8%) vs 10.6% (95% CI, 9.2%-12.2%; P = .03). The average duration of verbal handoffs per patient did not change. Verbal handoffs were more likely to occur in a quiet location (33.3%; 95% CI, 14.5%-52.2% vs 67.9%; 95% CI, 50.6%-85.2%; P = .03) and private location (50.0%; 95% CI, 30%-70% vs 85.7%; 95% CI, 72.8%-98.7%; P = .007) after the intervention.Implementation of a handoff bundle was associated with a significant reduction in medical errors and preventable adverse events among hospitalized children. Improvements in verbal and written handoff processes occurred, and resident workflow did not change adversely.

The goal of this study was to examine age and secular trends in bone and blood lead levels of community-exposed men. Bone and blood lead levels were measured twice, with a 3-year interval between measurements, among participants in a longitudinal study of aging. Seventy subjects (mean age = 66 years, age range = 52-83 years) with repeated measurements of bone and blood lead levels were studied. At the first evaluation, geometric mean lead levels in patella, tibia, and blood were 29.1 (standard deviation (SD) 1.8) microg/g, 17.5 (SD 2.0) microg/g, and 6.7 (SD 1.8) microg/dl, respectively. At the second evaluation, these levels were 22.2 (SD 1.8) microg/g, 17.9 (SD 1.7) microg/g, and 5.1 (SD 1.4) microg/dl, respectively. Cross-sectional analysis of each set of measurements indicated that, on average, a 1-year-older individual would have 2.7% and 2.4-3.2% higher levels of lead in patella and tibia, respectively. In contrast to the increasing age trend in cross-sectional analysis, the secular trend over time was decreasing for patella lead levels and stable for tibia lead levels. The authors conclude that in community-exposed middle-aged and elderly men, the biomarkers of exposure to lead are decreasing in patella and blood and unchanging in tibia as of the early 1990s. The increasing age trend in bone lead levels in cross-sectional studies should be carefully interpreted in light of the birth cohort effect.

The I-PASS Computer Module provides a unique platform for asynchronous, individualized learning of key elements of the I-PASS curriculum. It features embedded knowledge questions which provide an evaluation of learners' understanding of each of the major I-PASS concepts. In addition, individual subtopics may be accessed separately if one wishes to refresh knowledge of certain components of the I-PASS Curriculum. Video elements, supplemental printable documents, and test your knowledge questions are integrated into the module. In brief, we found in a detailed review of 10,740 patient admissions that a 23% reduction in medical errors and a 30% reduction in injuries due to medical errors (preventable adverse events) occurred following implementation of the I-PASS Handoff Bundle in nine academic medical centers. In direct observation of thousands of hours of resident workflow (time motion analysis) before and after implementation of the program, conducting handoffs using the I-PASS method was found to require no more time per handoff, and resident workflow throughout the shift was likewise unchanged, including no change in the amount of time spent at the computer or in direct patient care.

The Faculty Observation Tools section contains a set of assessment tools designed to be used by residency programs implementing the Core Resident Workshop in order to ensure that residents acquire competency in handoff skills, as well as to reinforce the I-PASS techniques and ensure sustainment of the I-PASS Handoff Curriculum. These tools are also meant to meet the ACGME Common Program Requirements that all training programs ensure and monitor effective patient handoffs. Included are tools to assess the skills of the giver and receiver of verbal handoffs, as well as a tool to assess the quality of a printed patient handoff document. In addition, we include detailed information about how to administer and apply each item in the assessment tools. The I-PASS Handoff Curriculum: Faculty Observation Tools is one of six submissions which are part of the I-PASS Handoff Curriculum Collection, created by a group of pediatric educators, health services researchers, and hospitalists to teach a standardized approach to handoffs in inpatient settings. This collection is a comprehensive, evidence-based, and consensus-driven suite of educational materials created for a multisite study that includes the following complementary components: the Core Resident Workshop, Handoff Simulation Exercises, the Online Module, the Campaign Toolkit, and Faculty Development Resources.

Communication failure is the leading root cause of sentinel events in hospitals. The increase in the number of handoffs related to new duty-hour standards in teaching hospitals creates additional opportunities for communication failure. The lack of standardized handoff processes in North American teaching hospitals prompted the I-PASS Study Group to create this curriculum as the educational intervention in a multi-site research study aimed at reducing medical errors and standardizing the handoff process in 10 pediatric residency programs across North America. The I-PASS Handoff Curriculum: Faculty Development Resources is one of six resources which are part of the I-PASS Handoff Curriculum Collection, created by a group of pediatric educators, health services researchers, and hospitalists to teach a standardized approach to handoffs in inpatient settings. This collection is a comprehensive, evidence-based, and consensus-driven suite of educational materials created for a multisite study that includes the following complementary components: the Core Resident Workshop, Handoff Simulation Exercises, Computer Module, the Campaign Toolkit, and Faculty Observation Tools. The Faculty Development Resources collection contains all of the necessary materials that an institution, division, or training program will need to educate and train faculty and Chief Resident champions for implementation of the I-PASS Handoff Program at their site. Also included in Faculty Development Resources is an interactive Faculty Development Presentation which features a series of simulation videos that allow faculty the opportunity to practice observing and evaluating handoffs. Speaker notes are provided to assist presenters. In addition, within the Faculty Development Resources, there are comprehensive instructions on how to use the Faculty Observation Tools to provide effective learner feedback.

Patient safety remains a major concern in the United States and worldwide. The most recent estimate from the US Department of Health and Human Services suggests that as many as 180 000 patients may die each year due to medical care–induced harm,1 a figure that would make it the nation’s third leading cause of death. An even higher number of patients suffer injuries due to medical care, from the minor and temporary to the life-threatening and permanently debilitating. Worldwide, similar rates of harm due to medical care are seen2; it is likely that millions worldwide die annually from preventable adverse events. Disturbing as these estimates may be, they are largely derived from studies of hospitalized adults. They reflect neither the true burden of harm that occurs in the community nor the true burden of harm to children. In an article in this issue, Walsh et al3 shine new light on an underexplored facet of the patient safety problem, in a small but rigorous, prospective observational study conducted in the homes of children with cancer. Through direct observations of medication administrations and reviews … Address correspondence to Christopher P. Landrigan, MD, MPH, Division of General Pediatrics, Boston Children’s Hospital, 300 Longwood Ave, Enders 1, Boston, MA 02115. E-mail: clandrigan{at}partners.org

I-PASS role-plays are simulation exercises that serve to bring all the I-PASS curricular elements together. The role-plays allow practice with the techniques and include resident and faculty feedback to help learners refine the skills learned and place them in context. Three role-plays involve performing an I-PASS handoff with a giver, receiver, and observer. Communication challenges, such as interruptions, are introduced in later role-plays to increase complexity as learners go through the exercises. The observer uses the faculty observation tools that faculty will subsequently use to evaluate live handoffs. The final role-play focuses on developing a shared mental model. In this exercise, each group of three is divided into a giver and two receivers who develop the action items, as well as the situation awareness and contingency planning portions of the written handoff based on the information from the giver. Neighboring groups perform the same exercise with slightly different information and then compare their success in developing a shared mental model. In brief, we found in a detailed review of 10,740 patient admissions that a 23% reduction in medical errors and a 30% reduction in injuries due to medical errors (preventable adverse events) occurred following implementation of the I-PASS Handoff Bundle in nine academic medical centers. In direct observation of thousands of hours of resident workflow (time motion analysis) before and after implementation of the program, conducting handoffs using the I-PASS method was found to require no more time per handoff, and resident workflow throughout the shift was likewise unchanged, including no change in the amount of time spent at the computer or in direct patient care.

Over the past decade, a series of studies have found that physicians-in-training who work extended shifts (>16 hours) are at increased risk of experiencing motor vehicle crashes, needlestick injuries, and medical errors. In response to public concerns and a request from Congress, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) conducted an inquiry into the issue and concluded in 2009 that resident physicians should not work for more than 16 consecutive hours without sleep. They further recommended that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Joint Commission work with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) to ensure effective enforcement of new work hour standards.The IOM's concerns with enforcement stem from well-documented non-compliance with the ACGME's 2003 work hour rules, and the ACGME's history of non-enforcement. In a nationwide cohort study, 84% of interns were found to violate the ACGME's 2003 standards in the year following their introduction.

The suite of I-PASS Campaign materials is designed to ensure successful I-PASS implementation at your institution. An Implementation Workbook and Curriculum Log are provided that give practical step-by-step instructions regarding I-PASS planning, development, and implementation. The Just in Time Didactic is a condensed presentation that revisits the major components of the I-PASS curriculum, and is designed for team members who may not have been using I-PASS recently (e.g., clinicians who may have substantial non-clinical commitments) as well as those who want a quick refresher. Speaker notes are provided to assist presenters. The visual advertising campaign includes standard-size pocket reference cards, screen frames for computer monitors, and posters for work areas, all of which can be produced locally using templates included within this Toolkit. I-PASS Tips of the Day could be formatted for printing as flip-books to display on chart racks or nursing stations, and mini-Tips can be tucked into fortune cookies! To ensure that you stay organized throughout the process, refer to the Implementation Workbook to keep track of key elements and timelines. Together and individually, these campaign materials will be essential for your successful I-PASS implementation. In brief, we found in a detailed review of 10,740 patient admissions that a 23% reduction in medical errors and a 30% reduction in injuries due to medical errors (preventable adverse events) occurred following implementation of the I-PASS Handoff Bundle in nine academic medical centers. In direct observation of thousands of hours of resident workflow (time motion analysis) before and after implementation of the program, conducting handoffs using the I-PASS method was found to require no more time per handoff, and resident workflow throughout the shift was likewise unchanged, including no change in the amount of time spent at the computer or in direct patient care.

An increasing weight of evidence is demonstrating that sleep deprivation and circadian rhythm disruption in doctors are associated with human error and harm to both patients and doctors. The increasing junior doctor workforce entering the hospital system in Australia provides a rare opportunity for workplace and roster reforms. There are cultural, educational and industrial challenges to reforming working hours. Any changes should be evidence-based and monitored to ensure that training for junior doctors and patient care are not compromised.

The Core Resident Workshop is the centerpiece of the I-PASS Curriculum Collection. The workshop features a 2-hour didactic and interactive session devoted to team training in structured communication techniques, and to the teaching of a standardized approach to the handoff process (including the integration of oral and written handoff components). Key structured team communication techniques and the I-PASS mnemonic are taught in detail and reinforced with the use of trigger videos and large group discussion. Ideally this 2-hour session is followed by the 1-hour handoff simulation exercises which features small group interactive role-plays in which participants gain hands-on experience and practice the I-PASS handoff technique. This workshop is also suitable for a faculty educational retreat. In brief, we found in a detailed review of 10,740 patient admissions that a 23% reduction in medical errors and a 30% reduction in injuries due to medical errors (preventable adverse events) occurred following implementation of the I-PASS Handoff Bundle in nine academic medical centers. In direct observation of thousands of hours of resident workflow (time motion analysis) before and after implementation of the program, conducting handoffs using the I-PASS method was found to require no more time per handoff, and resident workflow throughout the shift was likewise unchanged, including no change in the amount of time spent at the computer or in direct patient care.

This study assessed generalists' perceptions and challenges in providing care to sleep disorders patients and the role of sleep specialists in improving gaps in care.A mixed-method approach included qualitative (semi-structured interviews, discussion groups) and quantitative (online surveys) data collection techniques regarding care of patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and shift work disorder (SWD).OSA: generalists n = 165, specialists (internists, neurologists, psychiatrists, pulmonologists) n = 12; SWD: generalists n = 216, specialists n = 108. Generalists reported challenges in assessing sleep disorders and diagnosing patients with sleep complaints. Generalists lacked confidence (selected ≤ 3 on a 5-pt Likert scale) in managing polypharmacy and drug interactions (OSA: 54.2%; SWD: 62.6%), addiction (OSA: 61.8%), and continuous positive airway pressure (OSA: 66.5%). Generalists in both studies reported deficits in knowledge of monitoring sleep disorders (OSA: 57.7%; SWD: 78.7%), rather relying on patients' subjective reports; 23% of SWD generalists did not identify SWD as a medical condition. Challenges to generalist-specialist collaboration were reported, with 66% of generalists and 68% of specialists in the SWD study reporting lack of coordination as a barrier. Generalists reported lack of consistency in sleep medicine and a perceived lack of value in consulting with sleep specialists.Knowledge and attitudinal challenges were found in primary care of patients with sleep disorders. Sleep specialists need to clarify and educate practitioners regarding primary care's approach.

Importance Limited data exist regarding the incidence and nature of patient- and family-reported medical errors, particularly in pediatrics. Objective To determine the frequency with which parents experience patient safety incidents and the proportion of reported incidents that meet standard definitions of medical errors and preventable adverse events (AEs). Design, Setting, and Participants We conducted a prospective cohort study from May 2013 to October 2014 within 2 general pediatric units at a children’s hospital. Included in the study were English-speaking parents (N = 471) of randomly selected inpatients (ages 0-17 years) prior to discharge. Parents reported via written survey whether their child experienced any safety incidents during hospitalization. Two physician reviewers classified incidents as medical errors, other quality issues, or exclusions (κ = 0.64; agreement = 78%). They then categorized medical errors as harmful (ie, preventable AEs) or nonharmful (κ = 0.77; agreement = 89%). We analyzed errors/AEs using descriptive statistics and explored predictors of parent-reported errors using bivariate statistics. We subsequently reviewed patient medical records to determine the number of parent-reported errors that were present in the medical record. We obtained demographic/clinical data from hospital administrative records. Main Outcomes and Measures Medical errors and preventable AEs. Results The mean (SD) age of the 383 parents surveyed was 36.6 (8.9) years; most respondents (n = 266) were female. Of 383 parents surveyed (81% response rate), 34 parents (8.9%) reported 37 safety incidents. Among these, 62% (n = 23, 6.0 per 100 admissions) were determined to be medical errors on physician review, 24% (n = 9) were determined to be other quality problems, and 14% (n = 5) were determined to be neither. Thirty percent (n = 7, 1.8 per 100 admissions) of medical errors caused harm (ie, were preventable AEs). On bivariate analysis, children with medical errors appeared to have longer lengths of stay (median [interquartile range], 2.9 days [2.2-6.9] vs 2.5 days [1.9-4.1]; P = .04), more often had a metabolic (14.3% vs 3.0%; P = .04) or neuromuscular (14.3% vs 3.6%; P = .05) condition, and more often had an annual household income greater than $100 000 (38.1% vs 30.1%; P = .06) than those without errors. Fifty-seven percent (n = 13) of parent-reported medical errors were also identified on subsequent medical record review. Conclusions and Relevance Parents frequently reported errors and preventable AEs, many of which were not otherwise documented in the medical record. Families are an underused source of data about errors, particularly preventable AEs. Hospitals may wish to consider incorporating family reports into routine safety surveillance systems.