A Process of Acceptance of Patient Photographs in Electronic Medical Records to Confirm Patient Identification.

Appropriate patient identification is a critical component of safe health care delivery. With increasing reliance on electronic medical records (EMRs), errors of test ordering and documentation have become commonplace. Incorporating patients' photograph in the EMR has considerably decreased error frequency and improved health care delivery by making it easier for physicians to identify a patient. We conducted a survey of all 35 physicians working in the Executive Health Program to determine the importance of having patient photographs in the EMR. Of the 35 physicians who received the survey, 26 (74.3%) responded, 24 (92.3%) of whom agreed that it was important to improve patient identification, care, and safety. Based on these data, we implemented a quality improvement project to increase the percentage of new patients having a photograph included in the EMR. Our goal was to increase photograph inclusion by more than 20% from baseline within 6 months without any unintended consequences (ie, not slowing down any of the workflow during the intake process). The intervention took place between June 1, 2015, and February 8, 2016. Using Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control models, the baseline rate of photographs in the EMR was 49.5% (302 of 607). We initiated 3 Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles targeting awareness and data sharing campaigns. After the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, the weekly rate of patient photographs incorporated into the EMR was at 71.4%, which was significantly improved compared with baseline (F test, P<.001). No unintended consequences were identified. Increased inclusion of patient photographs in the EMR aided in patient identification and improved staff satisfaction with minimal interruption to workflow.

Periprocedural Anticoagulation Management of Patients with Thrombophilia.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate periprocedural management of the chronically anticoagulated patient with an inherited or acquired thrombophilia is uncertain. The objective of this study was to test "thrombophilia" as a potential predictor of the 3-month cumulative incidence of thromboembolism and major bleeding among chronically anticoagulated patients undergoing an invasive procedure. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study, consecutive chronically anticoagulated patients referred to the Mayo Thrombophilia Center for standardized periprocedural anticoagulation management who had venous thromboembolism and complete thrombophilia testing were categorized as "severe," "non-severe," or "no identifiable" thrombophilia. The 3-month cumulative incidence rates of thromboembolism, bleeding, and death were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier product limit method. RESULTS: Among 362 patients with complete thrombophilia testing, 165 (46%) had a defined thrombophilia; 76 patients had severe thrombophilia, mainly due to antiphospholipid syndrome (66%). Half of the patients in each of the 3 groups received pre- and postprocedure heparin. During follow-up, there were no thromboembolic events, rare major bleeding events (1% for each group), and 4 deaths. Due to the very low event rates for each of these outcomes, Cox proportional hazard modeling could not be performed. CONCLUSIONS: Periprocedural event rates were low irrespective of thrombophilia status. Inherited or acquired thrombophilia was not a predictor of thromboembolism, major bleeding, or mortality after temporary interruption of chronic anticoagulation for an invasive procedure.