Making Comfort Count: Using Quality Improvement to Promote Pediatric Procedural Pain Management.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pediatric procedural pain management (PPPM) is best practice but was inconsistent in our large multisite general academic medical center. We hypothesized that quality improvement (QI) methods would improve and standardize PPPM in our health system within inpatient pediatric units. We aimed to increase topical anesthetic use from 10% to 40%, improve nursing pediatric pain knowledge, and increase parent satisfaction around procedures for children admitted to a general tertiary academic medical center. METHODS: We used QI methods including needs assessment, self-identified champions, small tests of change, leadership accountability, data transparency, and a train-the-peer-trainer approach to implement PPPM. We measured inpatient use of topical anesthetic (goal of 40% of admissions), nursing pain knowledge, and parent satisfaction with child comfort during procedures. We used statistical process control and basic statistics to analyze data in this interrupted time series design. RESULTS: Over 18 months, use of topical lidocaine rose from 10% to 36.5% for all inpatient admissions, resulting in a centerline shift. Nursing pain knowledge scores increased 7%. Mean parent satisfaction around procedural comfort increased from 83% to 88%. CONCLUSIONS: A child-focused QI initiative around PPPM can succeed in a multisite general academic medical center. Key success factors for this effort included accountability, multidisciplinary core leadership, housewide training in a novel educational evidence-based framework, and use of data and champions to promote nurse and physician engagement. Future work will focus on sustaining and monitoring change.

Identification of patients with arthritis and arthritis-related functional limitation using administrative data.

OBJECTIVE: To develop algorithms on the basis of administrative data to identify patients with arthritis and arthritis-related functional limitation (AFL). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: In this retrospective study, 361 enrollees of a health plan underwent a clinical examination to confirm arthritis and assessment of functional limitation on the basis of responses to the health assessment questionnaire. Administrative data were obtained on these subjects and included arthritis drugs dispensed, as well as outpatient and emergency department diagnoses and procedures (including radiographic studies, arthritis procedures, and laboratory tests). Composite risk scores for arthritis and AFL were created on the basis of the association of arthritis-related healthcare utilization with confirmed arthritis and AFL. Algorithms were then developed on the basis of the composite risk scores using logistic regression models. RESULTS: The algorithm using the arthritis composite score to identify arthritis patients had an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.74, sensitivity of 75 percent and specificity of 57 percent. Similarly, the algorithm using the AFL composite score to identify patients with AFL had an AUC of 0.73, sensitivity of 62 percent, and specificity of 75 percent. CONCLUSION: The developed algorithms will enable health plans to screen their enrollees for persons with arthritis and AFL. This will facilitate enrollment of patients with arthritis and AFL in disease management programs and/or targeted interventions.

Polypharmacy with oral antidiabetic agents: an indicator of poor glycemic control.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate antidiabetic drug treatment patterns and glycemic control among patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study using the automated databases of a 200 000-member HMO. METHODS: The study population consisted of patients > or =18 years of age with documented type 2 diabetes mellitus from January 1, 2002, through December 31, 2002. We determined the proportion of patients who had optimal glycemic control (glycosylated hemoglobin <7%) during the 6 months after the initial documentation of diabetes during calendar year 2002 (index date). RESULTS: Of the 4282 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 1050 (25%) received 1 oral agent, 486 (11%) received 2 oral agents, 56 (1%) received > or =3 oral agents, 84 (2%) received insulin and an oral agent, and 107 (2%) received insulin exclusively within 90 days after the index date. Among the 1075 patients receiving antidiabetic drug therapy who had a laboratory test result documented, 414 (39%) had optimal glycemic control. Optimal control was most frequent among patients receiving 1 oral agent (47%) and least frequent among patients receiving > or =3 oral agents (13%) (P <.01). Patients with a prior history of suboptimal glycemic control were less likely to have optimal glycemic control. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple oral antidiabetic agents may serve as a marker for more severe, uncontrolled diabetes. The vast majority of patients treated with multiple oral antidiabetic agents had suboptimal glycemic control, suggesting a need for intensified efforts to treat this particular group of patients to recommended goal levels.

The costs associated with adverse drug events among older adults in the ambulatory setting.

BACKGROUND: Reducing the rate of adverse drug events in the ambulatory setting may require large investments in quality improvement efforts and technologic innovations. Little evidence is available on the potential resulting savings. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate the costs associated with adverse drug events among older adults in the ambulatory setting. RESEARCH DESIGN: This study consisted of a 1-year retrospective cohort study among Medicare enrollees of a large multispecialty group practice. The study included 1210 older adults with an adverse drug event. A matched comparison group was randomly selected from enrollees with recent healthcare encounters and medication dispenses. OUTCOME MEASURE: Difference between estimated costs for medical care utilization during the 6 weeks before and 6 weeks beginning on the day of an adverse drug event. RESULTS: For all adverse drug events, the increase in postevent costs over the preevent period was $1310 (95% confidence interval [CI], $625-$1995) greater for those experiencing an adverse drug event than the comparison group after controlling for age, sex, comorbidity, number of scheduled medications, and having been hospitalized during the preevent period. For preventable adverse drug events, the adjusted increase was $1983 (95% CI, $193-$3773) greater for cases. Based on rates of adverse drug events and these cost estimates, 1000 older adults would have annual costs related to adverse drug events in the ambulatory setting of $65,631 with $27,365 of this associated with preventable events. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse drug events in the ambulatory setting substantially increase the healthcare costs of elderly persons.