Adverse Patient Safety Events During the COVID-19 Epidemic.

METHODS: A retrospective descriptive analysis of patient safety events related to COVID-19 was performed on data that were submitted in the Joint Patient Safety Event Reporting System and Root Cause Analysis databases to the VHA National Center for Patient Safety from March 2020 to February 2021. Events were coded for type of event, location, and cause of event. RESULTS: Delays in care and staff/patients exposed to COVID-19 were the most common types of patient safety events, followed by COVID-19-positive patients eloping, laboratory processing errors, and one wrong procedure. The most frequently cited locations where events took place were emergency departments, medical units, community living centers, and intensive care units. Confusion over procedures, care not provided because of COVID-19, and failure to identify COVID-positive patient before they exposed others to COVID were the most common causes for patient safety events. DISCUSSION: Our results are similar to other studies of patient safety during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on these results, we recommend the following: (1) focus on patient safety culture, leadership, and governance; (2) proactively develop competency checklists, cognitive aids, and other tools for healthcare staff who are working in new or unfamiliar clinical settings; (3) augment or enhance communication efforts with patient safety huddles or briefings at all levels within a healthcare organization to proactively uncover risk and mitigate fear by explaining changes in policies and procedures; and (4) maximize the use of quality and patient safety experts who are knowledgeable in system and human factor theories as well as change management to assist in redesigning clinical workflows and processes.

Errors upstream and downstream to the Universal Protocol associated with wrong surgery events in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: The Universal Protocol has been associated with the prevention of wrong surgery procedures; however, such events still occur. This article explores wrong surgery events, defined as those incorrect procedures (wrong site, wrong side, wrong procedure, wrong patient, wrong level, wrong implant) that would have occurred despite the Universal Protocol including the performance of a time-out by the surgical team. Understanding why some of these events are not caught by the steps of the Universal Protocol, culminating in the time-out, can help the field to add upstream and downstream safeguards to help prevent these never events. METHODS: The Veterans Health Administration database of root cause analyses was queried for all cases involving an incorrect surgical procedure between 2004 and 2013 to determine the relative frequency and characteristics of wrong surgery events because of errors upstream and downstream to the Universal Protocol. This subgroup of wrong surgery events was selected from among all the wrong surgery events by 2 clinicians with expertise in patient safety (Kappa = .91). RESULTS: Forty-eight cases of wrong surgery events because of upstream/downstream errors were analyzed, representing 16% of the 308 root cause analyses for wrong surgery events reported during this period. Upstream errors included mislabeling of specimens, while downstream errors were associated with ineffective intraoperative process. Surgical procedures that were particularly vulnerable included wrong level spine operations, wrong patient prostatectomies, wrong implant cataract procedures, and wrong site skin lesion excisions. CONCLUSIONS: Wrong surgery events can and do occur despite adherence to Universal Protocol including a time-out. The prevention of incorrect procedures requires complementary safety behaviors and technologies to address errors that occur upstream and downstream to the Universal Protocol and the time-out.

Sharing lessons learned to prevent incorrect surgery.

The purpose of this report is to discuss surgical adverse event lessons learned and to recommend action. Examples of incorrect surgical adverse events managed in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patient safety system and results of a survey regarding the impact of the surgery lessons learned process are provided. The VHA implemented a process for sharing deidentified stories of surgical lessons learned. The cases are in-operating room selected examples from lessons learned from October 1, 2009, to June 30, 2011. Examples selected illustrate helpful human factors principles. To learn more about the awareness and impact of the lessons learned, we conducted a survey with Chiefs of Surgery in the VHA. The types of examples of adverse events include wrong eye implants, incorrect nerve blocks, and wrong site excisions of lesions. These are accompanied by human factors recommendations and change concepts such as designing the system to prevent mistakes, using differentiation, minimizing handoffs, and standardizing how information is communicated. The survey response rate was 76 per cent (88 of 132). Of those who had seen the surgical lessons learned (76% [67 of 88]), the majority (87%) reported they were valuable and 85% that they changed or reinforced patient safety behaviors in their facility as a result of surgical lessons learned. Simply having a policy will not ensure patient safety. When reviewing adverse events, human factors must be considered as a cause for error and for the failure to follow policy without assigning blame. VHA surgeons reported that the surgery lessons learned were valuable and impacted practice.

Association between implementation of a medical team training program and surgical morbidity.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there is an association between the Veterans Health Administration Medical Team Training (MTT) program and surgical morbidity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective health services study was conducted with a contemporaneous control group. Outcome data were obtained from the Veterans Health Administration Surgical Quality Improvement Program. The analysis included aggregated measures representing 119,383 sampled procedures from 74 Veterans Health Administration facilities that provide care to veterans. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the rate of change in annual surgical morbidity rate 1 year after facilities enrolled in the MTT program as compared with 1 year before and compared with the non-MTT program sites. RESULTS: Facilities in the MTT program (n = 42) had a significant decrease of 17% in observed annual surgical morbidity rate (rate ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.79-0.88; P = .01). Facilities not trained (n = 32) had an insignificant decrease of 6% in observed morbidity (rate ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86-1.05; P = .11). After adjusting for surgical risk, we found a decrease of 15% in morbidity rate for facilities in the MTT program and a decrease of 10% for those not yet in the program. The risk-adjusted annual surgical morbidity rate declined in both groups, and the decline was 20% steeper in the MTT program group (P = .001) after propensity-score matching. The steeper decline in annual surgical morbidity rates was also observed in specific morbidity outcomes, such as surgical infection. CONCLUSION: The Veterans Health Administration MTT program is associated with decreased surgical morbidity.

Briefing guide study: preoperative briefing and postoperative debriefing checklists in the Veterans Health Administration medical team training program.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine the outcomes of checklist-driven preoperative briefings and postoperative debriefings during the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical team training program. METHODS: A briefing score (1, never started; 2, started then discontinued; 3, maintained on original targeted cases; 4, expanded to other services; 5, briefing all cases, all services) was established at 10.1 ± .3 months after introduction of the checklist. Outcomes included antibiotic and deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis compliance rates before and after use of the checklist. RESULTS: Antibiotic (97.0% ± .1% vs 92.1% ± 1.5%; P = .01) and deep venous thrombosis (95.7% ± .8% vs 85.1% ± 4.6%; P = .05) prophylaxis compliance rates were higher after initiation of a surgical checklist. CONCLUSIONS: Checklist-driven preoperative briefings and postoperative debriefings are associated with improvements in patient safety for surgical patients.

Association between implementation of a medical team training program and surgical mortality.

CONTEXT: There is insufficient information about the effectiveness of medical team training on surgical outcomes. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented a formalized medical team training program for operating room personnel on a national level. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether an association existed between the VHA Medical Team Training program and surgical outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective health services study with a contemporaneous control group was conducted. Outcome data were obtained from the VHA Surgical Quality Improvement Program (VASQIP) and from structured interviews in fiscal years 2006 to 2008. The analysis included 182,409 sampled procedures from 108 VHA facilities that provided care to veterans. The VHA's nationwide training program required briefings and debriefings in the operating room and included checklists as an integral part of this process. The training included 2 months of preparation, a 1-day conference, and 1 year of quarterly coaching interviews MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The rate of change in the mortality rate 1 year after facilities enrolled in the training program compared with the year before and with nontraining sites. RESULTS: The 74 facilities in the training program experienced an 18% reduction in annual mortality (rate ratio [RR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.91; P = .01) compared with a 7% decrease among the 34 facilities that had not yet undergone training (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.80-1.06; P = .59). The risk-adjusted mortality rates at baseline were 17 per 1000 procedures per year for the trained facilities and 15 per 1000 procedures per year for the nontrained facilities. At the end of the study, the rates were 14 per 1000 procedures per year for both groups. Propensity matching of the trained and nontrained groups demonstrated that the decline in the risk-adjusted surgical mortality rate was about 50% greater in the training group (RR,1.49; 95% CI, 1.10-2.07; P = .01) than in the nontraining group. A dose-response relationship for additional quarters of the training program was also demonstrated: for every quarter of the training program, a reduction of 0.5 deaths per 1000 procedures occurred (95% CI, 0.2-1.0; P = .001). CONCLUSION: Participation in the VHA Medical Team Training program was associated with lower surgical mortality.

Code debriefing from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Team Training program improves the cardiopulmonary resuscitation code process.

A Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center developed a brief questionnaire to support the identification of issues and the continuous improvement of the cardiopulmonary resuscitation process and its outcomes.

The role of the operating room nurse manager in the successful implementation of preoperative briefings and postoperative debriefings in the VHA Medical Team Training Program.

To improve communication within surgical teams, Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented a Medical Team Training Program (MTT) based on the principles of crew resource management. One hundred two VHA facilities were analyzed. Nursing leadership participation in the planning stages of the program was compared with outcomes at follow-up. Nurse manager participation in planning was associated with higher rates of implementation of preoperative briefing and postoperative debriefing. Nurse managers are a critical component in the planning phase of team training programs focused on OR clinical staff.

Predictors of successful implementation of preoperative briefings and postoperative debriefings after medical team training.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine which factors at a medical team training learning session predict future success in the implementation of preoperative briefings and postoperative debriefings at health care facilities. METHODS: A Likert score rating for physician involvement, leadership support, and composition of the implementation team was recorded for 64 VHA facilities at the time of a learning session by 3 medical team training educators. At a mean follow-up period of 8.2 months (standard error, .4 mo), a briefing score was established from quarterly semistructured interviews with the facility's implementation team. RESULTS: In a multivariable regression, leadership involvement at the time of the learning session was the best predictor of future briefing/debriefing success (R = .34, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Full implementation of the patient safety tool preoperative briefings and postoperative debriefings is dependent on facility leadership support.