Improving Resident Physician Participation in Reporting Patient Safety and Quality Concerns.

Background: Reporting medical errors, near misses, and adverse events is an important component of improving patient safety and resident learning. Studies have revealed that event reporting rates can be low for physicians, resident physicians, and fellows. The objective of this quality improvement project was to improve resident reporting of patient safety and quality events and engage residents in the analysis of events at a community-based teaching hospital in the United States. Methods: We developed a program to engage 122 residents from 6 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited residency programs using a multifaceted approach that included instructing residents how to use the hospital's adverse event reporting system; requiring first-year residents to submit at least 1 report; reviewing all resident reports during a monthly multidisciplinary meeting; and ensuring that each resident who submitted a report received feedback on how the concern was being addressed. Results: The program resulted in a 41.8% (95% CI 31%-53%) absolute increase in the number of residents reporting a concern, and resident submissions led to several documented improvements in patient care. A survey was administered to the residents who submitted reports, and the majority (76.0% response rate) expressed satisfaction with both the reporting system and the feedback about how their submission was being addressed. The responding residents agreed that they were more likely to submit reports because of their experience with the program and that they felt the program would improve safety and the quality of care at the institution. Conclusion: This quality improvement project successfully increased resident event reporting and engaged residents in the review of submitted events. The program can serve as a model for other teaching hospitals.

Mixed Martial Arts: Comparing the King-Devick and Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 5 in knockouts, technical knockouts and choke holds.

Objective: To compare validity indices of the King-Devick (KD) test and Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 5 (SCAT5) for traumatic events in MMA, and to determine if perfusion events (alterations in consciousness as the result of choke holds) cause similar changes in KD/SCAT5 scores. Design: A prospective cohort study in MMA fighters who completed KD and SCAT5 assessments before and after a match. Outcomes were categorized as non-event, traumatic event, or perfusion event. KD/SCAT5 changes were compared between all athletes. Participants: One hundred forty MMA athletes (7 women, 133 men), mean age=27.1 ± 4.9 years. Intervention: N/A. Main outcome measures: King-Devick (KD) test and Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 5 (SCAT5). Results: Among the 140 athletes, 19 sustained traumatic and 15 perfusion events. Testing provided sensitivities/specificities of 21.05%/93.39% (KD) and 77.78%/52.99% (SCAT5) in detecting a traumatic event. KD and SCAT5 Symptom Severity scores differed between athletes with and without traumatic events (P=.041 and .014). KD and SCAT5 Symptoms Score changes were observed between athletes with and without traumatic events (P=.023 and .042). Neither KD nor SCAT5 differed significantly between athletes with and without perfusion events. Conclusions: The KD test provides high specificity and the SCAT5 demonstrates reasonable sensitivity when detecting a traumatic event. Of the SCAT5, symptoms-related scores may most effectively identify a traumatic event. A traumatic event may cause KD/SCAT5 changes similar to a concussion, while perfusion events did not.