Morbidity and Mortality Conference: Its Purpose Reclaimed and Grounded in Theory

Surgeon Perceptions and Variations in Surgical Morbidity and Mortality Conference: Report of a Survey from the American College of Surgeons Board of Governors

OBJECTIVE

To highlight the evolution of surgical morbidity and mortality conferences (MMCs) from the early 20th century as a means of identifying surgeon error into current practices as identifying hospital-based system factors that contribute to adverse patient events. Further, to elucidate differences in the perception of MMCs between trainees and attending surgeons as well as differences in the structure of MMCs geographically and by institution type.

DESIGN

We developed a survey that was distributed to current American College of Surgeon members through Survey Monkey.

SETTING

Survey-based study.

PARTICIPANTS

Current members of the American College of Surgeons, including Board of Governors, surgeons, and trainees.

RESULTS

There were a total of 1,396 responses to the survey, 814 (58%) from surgical trainees and 582 (42%) from attending surgeons. Both surgical trainees and attending surgeons noted that the most common day for MMCs was Wednesday and that the most common time for MMCs was before 7:30 AM. Further, most surgical trainees and attending surgeons noted that there was no structured format to their institution's MMCs and that increased attending surgeon engagement would make MMCs more educational. Significant variations in MMCs existed across both geographic region and by institution type.

CONCLUSION

The results from this survey highlight key aspects of MMCs that contribute to their educational value. Staff engagement was noted to be the most educational aspect of MMCs. While geographic and institutional differences will likely persist, efforts should be made to increase staff engagement at MMCs in addition to a more structured approach.

Goals of Morbidity and Mortality meetings in paediatric acute care. A qualitative case study

Morbidity and Mortality meetings are conducted in varied clinical contexts including paediatrics. Widely cited as an educational or quality improvement tool, the reality is more complex. In this qualitative study, the aim was to explore the perceived goals of the paediatric acute care Morbidity and Morbidity meeting. This study used semi-structured interviews and observation within a qualitative case study methodology. Data were collected in a large paediatric quaternary hospital. Analysis generated themes related to meeting observations and the participant's interpretation of meeting goals. A total of 44 interviews were conducted with 14 nurses, 29 doctors, and 1 allied health professional. Thirty-two meetings in six clinical departments were observed. Two themes were developed: complex and nuanced goals; and tensions and contest between and within goals. Meeting goals to evaluate care, learn, support, adhere, and change and respond were sometimes in competition and had varied interpretations. Morbidity and Mortality meetings in this setting are valued and occupy a complex role which reaches beyond identification of measurable patient safety interventions. Understanding goals more fully can lead to optimised conduct and meaningful measurement of efficacy. The strength in these meetings may be the way they promote an embedded safety culture, and an informed and skilled workforce.

Education Research: Sustained Implementation of Quality Improvement Practices Is Observed in Early Career Physicians Following a Neurology Resident QI Curriculum

Background and Objectives

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology expect engagement in quality improvement (QI) activities for all residents and practicing neurologists. Our neurology residency program instituted an experiential Neurology Residency QI Curriculum in 2015 for all residents. In this study, we aimed to characterize the role of QI engagement in the early-career paths of program graduates.

Methods

We distributed an online survey evaluating QI training, scholarship, and leadership (before, during, and after residency training) to all individuals who graduated from our residency program (graduation years 2017-2021). Primary outcomes were QI project leadership or mentorship and QI scholarship (projects, posters, and publications) after residency. Predictors of these outcomes were also evaluated using Fisher exact test.

Results

Twenty-nine of 50 graduates (58%) completed the survey. Median time from residency graduation was 3 years. Of the respondents, 14% actively participated in a QI project before residency, 83% during residency, and 48% after graduating. In addition, 41% had led or mentored a QI project and 34% had performed QI scholarship since residency. Fourteen percent of participants held formal roles in QI or patient safety, while 24% received formal full-time equivalents for QI work. Significant predictors (p < 0.05) of QI leadership included older age, time since graduation, rank, and participation in Clinical Effectiveness Leadership Training (CELT-an institutional QI faculty development course). Significant predictors (p < 0.05) of QI scholarship included older age, time since graduation, participation in CELT, and participation in QI scholarship during residency. QI training, participation, and/or project leadership before residency did not predict either QI leadership or scholarship after residency.

Discussion

Many neurology residency graduates continued to lead QI projects and produce QI scholarship in the early years after graduation. However, receiving protected time for leadership and academic work in this area is uncommon. Our findings suggest that more infrastructure, including training, career development, and mentorship, can foster neurologists interested in leading in quality and patient safety. In academic models, promotion pathways that support academic advancement for faculty leading in QI are needed.

Goals of the Morbidity and Mortality meeting in acute care: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to describe what is known about understandings of the goals of the Morbidity and Mortality meeting.

REVIEW METHODS USED

The study utilised scoping review methodology.

DATA SOURCES

Papers in English presenting empirical data published in academic journals with Morbidity and Mortality meetings as the central concept of study. Included papers presented data about the perception of stakeholders about goals of the Morbidity and Mortality meeting. Medline, Embase, and CINAHL databases were search conducted from earliest record - October 20th 2021. A manual search of the reference lists of all included papers identified further eligible papers.

REVIEW METHODS

Data about the location, participant type, and methods/ methodology were extracted and entered onto a database. Content analysis of the results and discussion sections of qualitative papers yielded broad categories of meeting goal. This provided a framework for the organisation of the quantitative findings, which were subsequently extracted and charted under these categories.

RESULTS

Twenty-five papers were included in the review, and six main categories were identified in the qualitative synthesis of findings. These included meeting goals related to quality and safety, education, legal and reputational risk management, professional culture, family/caregivers, and peer support.

CONCLUSIONS

There are heterogeneous understandings of key terminologies used to describe Morbidity and Mortality meeting goals, particularly evident within understandings of educational and quality and safety meeting goals. This paper defines and unravels this complexity in a way that researchers and clinicians can define, compare and evaluate their own department's meeting goals.

Implementation of morbidity and mortality conference in a community hospital NICU and narrative review

Background

The process of morbidity and mortality review (MMR) is recognized as an essential component of quality improvement, patient safety, attitudes towards patient safety, and continuing education. Despite the common use of MMR for all disciplines of medical care, recommendations have not been published regarding the implementation of MMR in a community hospital setting in the United States.

Objectives

Review the literature on MMR conferences. Describe the implementation of an MMR conference in a community hospital neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

Conclusions

The establishment of a case overview method of MMR is feasible for a community hospital NICU. It increases staff and physician group awareness and education over common and complex mortality and morbidity etiologies, improves staff participation with unit management, links case presentation with open discussion and action items, and identifies opportunities for systemic changes to improve patient care.

Defining a High-Quality and Effective Morbidity and Mortality Conference: A Systematic Review

Importance

Morbidity and mortality conferences (MMCs) are thought to advance trainee education, quality improvement (QI), and faculty development. However, there is considerable variability with regard to their completion.

Objective

To compile and analyze the literature describing the format, design, and other attributes of MMCs that appear to best advance their stated objectives related to QI and practitioner education.

Evidence Review

For this systematic review, a literature search with terms combining conference and QI or morbidity and mortality was performed in January 2022, using the PubMed, Embase, and ERIC (Education Resources Information Center) databases with no date restrictions. Included studies were published in English and described surgical or nonsurgical MMCs with explicit reference to quality or system improvement, education, professional development, or patient outcomes; these studies were classified by design as survey based, intervention based, or other methodologies. For survey-based studies, positively and negatively regarded attributes of conference design, format, and completion were extracted. For intervention-based studies, details of the intervention and their impact on stated MMC objectives were abstracted. Principal study findings were summarized for the other group. Study quality was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI). Abstract screening, full-text review, and data extraction and analysis were completed between January 2022 and December 2022.

Findings

A total of 59 studies met appropriateness for study inclusion. The mean MERSQI score for the included studies was 6.7 (range, 5.0-9.5) of a maximum possible 18, which implied that the studies were of average quality. The evidence suggested that preparation and postconference follow-up regarding QI initiatives are equally as important as both (1) succinctly presenting case details, opportunities for improvement, and educational topics and (2) creating a constructive space for accountability, engagement, and multistakeholder discussion.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that the published literature on MMCs provides substantial insight into the optimal format, design, and related attributes of an effective MMC. This systematic review provides a road map for surgical departments to improve MMCs in order to align their format and design with their principal objectives related to practitioner and trainee education, error prevention, and QI.

Academic half days, noon conferences and classroom-based education in postgraduate medical education: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Classroom-based education (CBE) is ubiquitous in postgraduate medical education (PGME), but to date no studies have synthesized the literature on the topic. We conducted a scoping review focusing on academic half days and noon conferences.

METHODS

We searched 4 databases (MEDLINE [OVID], Embase [OVID], ERIC [EBSCO] and Web of Science) from inception to December 2021, performed reference and citation harvesting, and applied predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria to our screening. We used 2 frameworks for the analysis: "experiences, trajectories and reifications" and "description, justification and clarification."

RESULTS

We included 90 studies, of which 55 focused on resident experiences, 29 on trajectories and 6 on reification. We classified 44 studies as "description," 38 as "justification" and 8 as "clarification." In the description studies, 12 compared academic half days with noon conferences, 23 described specific teaching topics, and 9 focused on resources needed for CBE. Justification studies examined the effects of CBE on outcomes, such as examination scores (17) and use of teaching strategies in team-based learning, principles of adult learning and e-learning (15). Of the 8 clarification studies, topics included the role of CBE in PGME, stakeholder perspectives and transfer of knowledge between classroom and workplace.

INTERPRETATION

Much of the existing literature is either a description of various aspects of CBE or justification of particular teaching strategies. Few studies exist on how and why CBE works; future studies should aim to clarify how CBE facilitates resident learning within the sociocultural framework of PGME.

Best Practices for Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory Morbidity and Mortality Conferences

Cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) morbidity and mortality conferences (MMCs) are a critical component of CCL quality improvement programs and are important for the education of cardiology trainees and the lifelong learning of CCL physicians and team members. Despite their fundamental role in the functioning of the CCL, no consensus exists on how CCL MMCs should identify and select cases for review, how they should be conducted, and how results should be used to improve CCL quality. In addition, medicolegal ramifications of CCL MMCs are not well understood. This document from the American College of Cardiology's Interventional Section attempts to clarify current issues and options in the conduct of CCL MMCs and to recommend best practices for their conduct.

Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis: Identifying prognostic factors using a method derived from morbidity and mortality conferences

Objectives

Lethality of Staphylococcus aureus (Sa) infective endocarditis (IE) is high and might be due to yet unidentified prognostic factors. The aim of this study was to search for new potential prognostic factors and assess their prognostic value in SaIE.

Materials and methods

We used a two-step exploratory approach. First, using a qualitative approach derived from mortality and morbidity conferences, we conducted a review of the medical records of 30 patients with SaIE (15 deceased and 15 survivors), randomly extracted from an IE cohort database (NCT03295045), to detect new factors of possible prognostic interest. Second, we collected quantitative data for these factors in the entire set of SaIE patients and used multivariate Cox models to estimate their prognostic value.

Results

A total of 134 patients with modified Duke definite SaIE were included, 64 of whom died during follow-up. Of the 56 candidate prognostic factors identified at the first step, 3 had a significant prognostic value in multivariate analysis: the prior use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [aHR 3.60, 95% CI (1.59-8.15), p = 0.002]; the non-performance of valve surgery when indicated [aHR 1.85, 95% CI (1.01-3.39), p = 0.046]; and the decrease of vegetation size on antibiotic treatment [aHR 0.34, 95% CI (0.12-0.97), p = 0.044].

Conclusion

We identified three potential SaIE prognostic factors. These results, if externally validated, might eventually help improve the management of patients with SaIE.

Learning Outcomes from an Academic Internal Medicine Morbidity and Mortality Conference

BACKGROUND

Morbidity and Mortality (M&M) conferences are widely utilized clinical teaching forums across the USA. Recent literature demonstrates heterogeneity in the educational objectives of M&M, with prior authors suggesting a variety of overarching purposes of the conference, including teaching quality improvement methods; promotion of patient safety; enhancement of clinical knowledge and skills; and reflection on humanistic aspects of medical practice. There is less information in the published literature regarding learning outcomes of M&M participants.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to describe learning outcomes from the Internal Medicine Morbidity, Mortality, and Improvement conference at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center.

DESIGN

Directed content analysis of learning outcomes statements.

PARTICIPANTS

Internal medicine physicians who requested Maintenance of Certification credit for one or more conference sessions during the 2017-2018 academic year.

APPROACH

Two independent reviewers analyzed 347 learning outcomes statements submitted by 49 conference participants. The reviewers used an iterative process to code content themes (the category of medical or healthcare delivery knowledge learned) and learning implementation domains (the context or manner in which learning would be applied), and to identify comments regarding the shared experience of practicing medicine.

KEY RESULTS

Seventy-eight percent of comments described learning related to clinical knowledge and skills, and 28%, 34%, and 9% of comments described learning related to clinical reasoning skills, systems knowledge, and the need for systems change, respectively. Most conferences generated learning within a variety of themes and across multiple domains. Sixty-four percent of conferences included at least one reflection on the shared experience of practicing medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants derived several types of learning from this Internal Medicine M&M conference. Although clinical knowledge and skills represent the most common type of learning, the conference also produces rich learning in other domains as well as reflections on the humility, challenges, and meaning of being a physician.

Two-Year Profile of Preventable Errors in Hospital-Based Neurology

Background and Objectives:

Medical errors are estimated to cause 7,000 deaths and cost 17-29 billion USD per year, but there is a lack of published real-world data on preventable errors, in particular in hospital-based neurology. We sought to characterize the profile of errors that occur on the inpatient neurology services at our institution in order to inform strategies on future error prevention.

Methods:

We reviewed all cases of preventable errors occurring on the inpatient neurology services from July 1, 2018 to June 30, 2020, logged in institutional error reporting systems and reviewed at departmental morbidity and mortality conferences (M&MC). Each case was characterized by primary category of error, level of harm as determined by the Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality (AHRQ) Common Format Harm Scale version 1.2, primary intervention, and recurrence within one year, with a final censoring date of June 30, 2021.

Results:

Of 72 cases, 43 (60%) were attributed to errors in clinical decision-making and 20 (28%) to systems or electronic health record-related errors. The majority of cases resulted in in-conference education on systems-based errors (29%) at departmental M&MCs followed by in-conference education on clinical neurology (25%). Among errors classified primarily as clinical, 28% were addressed via systems-based interventions including in-conference education on systems issues and changes in written protocol. In 23 cases (32%), a similar error recurred within one year of the presentation. In total, 7 cases (10%) resulted in a change in written protocol, none with recurrences.

Discussion:

Systems-based interventions may reduce both clinical and systems-based errors, and protocol changes are effective when feasible. Given the important goal of optimizing care for every patient, quality leaders should conduct continuous audits of preventable errors and quality improvement systems in their clinical areas.

Health Equity Morbidity and Mortality Conferences in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Maternal mortality and morbidity continue to occur at unacceptably high levels in the United States, with communities of color experiencing significantly higher rates than their White counterparts, even after adjustment for confounding factors such as socioeconomic status. Many obstetrics and gynecology departments across the country have begun to incorporate routine discussion and analysis of health equity into peer review and educational processes, including grand rounds and morbidity and mortality conferences. Despite the desire and drive, there is little published guidance on best practices for incorporation of an equity component into these conferences. This document outlines the current processes at four academic institutions to highlight the variety of ways in which health equity and social justice can be incorporated when analyzing patient experiences and health outcomes. This commentary also provides a list of specific recommendations based on the combined experiences at these institutions so that others across the country can incorporate principles of health equity into their peer-review processes.

Quality of Heart Failure Care in the Intensive Care Unit

Patients with heart failure (HF) who are seen in an intensive care unit (ICU) manifest the highest-risk, most complex and most resource-intensive disease states. These patients account for a large relative proportion of days spent in an ICU. The paradigms by which critical care is provided to patients with HF are being reconsidered, including consideration of various multidisciplinary ICU staffing models and the development of acute-response teams. Traditional HF quality initiatives have centered on the peri- and postdischarge period in attempts to improve adherence to guideline-directed therapies and reduce readmissions. There is a compelling rationale for expanding high-quality efforts in treating patients with HF who are receiving critical care so we can improve outcomes, reduce preventable harm, improve teamwork and resource use, and achieve high health-system performance. Our goal is to answer the following question: For a patient with HF in the ICU, what is required for the provision of high-quality care? Herein, we first review the epidemiology of HF syndromes in the ICU and identify relevant critical care and quality stakeholders in HF. We next discuss the tenets of high-quality care for patients with HF in the ICU that will optimize critical care outcomes, such as ICU staffing models and evidence-based management of cardiac and noncardiac disease. We discuss strategies to mitigate preventable harm, improve ICU culture and conduct outcomes review, and we conclude with our summative vision of high-quality of ICU care for patients with HF; our vision includes clinical excellence, teamwork and ICU culture.

What are the participants' perspective and the system-based impact of a standardized, inter-professional morbidity/mortality-conferences in a children's hospital?

Background

Morbidity and mortality conferences (MMC) are well established but little data exists on inter-professional aspects, system-based outcomes and characteristics in pediatric departments. Our study aim was to analyze the system-based impact and to assess participant's perspectives on standardized, inter-professional MMCs in a children's hospital.

Methods

In a prospective observational analysis the inter-professional MMCs held at a tertiary teaching children's hospital in Switzerland were analyzed for (I) resulting clinical consequences and (II) participants perception on format, usefulness and no-blame atmosphere.

Results

Eighteen MMC, discussing 29 cases were analyzed. Twenty-seven clinical errors/problems were identified and 17 clinical recommendations were developed: ten new or changed clinical guidelines, two new therapeutic alternatives, three new teaching activities, and two guidelines on specific diagnostics. Altogether, the 466 participants evaluated the conferences favorably. Little differences were seen in the evaluations of physicians of different disciplines or seniority but non-physicians scored all questions lower than physicians. Overall, three quarters of the participants felt that there was a no-blame culture during the conferences but results varied depending on the cases discussed.

Conclusions

An inter-professional MMC can have relevant impact on clinical practice and affect system-based changes. Inter-professional conferences are profitable for all participants but evaluated differently according to profession. A standardized format and the presence of a moderator are helpful, but not a guarantee for a no-blame culture. Highly emotional cases are a risk factor to relapse to "blame and shame". A time gap between the event and the MMC may have a beneficial effect.

Keywords

Inter-professional communication; inter-professional health care; learning from failure; morbidity and mortality conference (MMC); patient safety; psychological safety.

The Morbidity & Mortality Assessment Tool (MMAT): Design and Proof of Concept

BACKGROUND

Morbidity and Mortality Conference (MMC) is a traditional quality assessment tool among surgical residencies to evaluate complications within their care and to integrate and educate best practices. Unfortunately, it is difficult to validate and measure loop closure as a result of MMC. This may result in repeating past mistakes or worse, becoming a meeting of anecdotal experiences. The goal of this study is to present results from a morbidity and mortality assessment tool (MMAT) which provides a means of measuring and tracking factors related to those surgical complications discussed within the MMC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three years of MMC presentations were organized into a database and further divided and organized into variables which included case by the class year of the presenting resident, service line, month the case was presented, and potential contributing factors. Contributing factors considered for each case were categorized as: Systems-Based, Direct Patient Care, and Interpersonal Communication. Contributing factors were assigned to cases by a review committee consisting of residents and faculty members.

RESULTS

The lack of knowledge, technical error, lack of experience, lack of supervision, failure to communicate with team members were present in greater than 10% of the presented cases. There was a "July Effect" in the Trauma service, where there was a statistically significant difference between the percentage of cases presented that involved Failure to Communicate errors when compared with the remainder of the year.

CONCLUSIONS

MMAT allows longitudinal collection of data from each MMC to recognize patterns that facilitate improvements in systems of care and institutional memory.

Implementation status of morbidity and mortality conferences in Austrian hospitals-A cross-sectional national survey study

INTRODUCTION

Morbidity and mortality conferences (M&MCs) are an instrument for learning from past complications, unexpected follow-ups and deaths in hospitals and are important for improving patient safety. However, there are currently no quantitative data on the implementation of M&MCs in Austria. The aim of the study was to determine the status quo of the M&MCs in Austria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A national cross-sectional study was conducted by means of a survey of 982 chief physicians of surgical disciplines, internal medicine, anesthesiology, intensive care, gynecology/obstetrics and pediatrics. The questionnaire focused on overall goals, structure and procedures of hospital M&MCs.

RESULTS

Of the 982 contacted chief physicians, 314 (32.0%) completed the survey. Almost two thirds of the respondents, i.e. 203 (64.7%), had already implemented M&MCs. Of the 111 chief physicians who had not yet introduced M&MCs, 62 (55.9%) were interested in introducing such conferences in the future. Of the 203 respondents that had implemented M&MCs, 100 stated that their M&MC could be improved. They reported issues with "shame and blame" culture, hierarchical structures, too little knowledge about the capability of M&MC and, in particular, time constraints. Overall, the participating chief physicians showed that they are striving to improve their existing M&MCs.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

While we found a relatively high number of already implemented M&MCs we also identified a large heterogeneity in the format of the M&MCs. A highly structured M&MC including guidelines, checklists or templates does not only considerably improve its outcome but can also alleviate the main limiting factor which is the lack of time.

Anonymity Decreases the Punitive Nature of a Departmental Morbidity and Mortality Conference

OBJECTIVES

We sought to analyze the effect of an anonymous morbidity and mortality (M&M) conference on participants' attitudes toward the educational and punitive nature of the conference. We theorized that an anonymous conference might be more educational, less punitive, and would shift analysis of cases toward systems-based analysis and away from individual cognitive errors.

METHODS

We implemented an anonymous M&M conference at an academic emergency medicine program. Using a pre-post design, we assessed attitudes toward the educational and punitive nature of the conference as well as the perceived focus on systems versus individual errors analyzed during the conference. Means and standard deviations were compared using a paired t test.

RESULTS

Fifteen conferences were held during the study period and 53 cases were presented. Sixty percent of eligible participants (n = 38) completed both the pretest and posttest assessments. There was no difference in the perceived educational value of the conference (4.42 versus 4.37, P = 0.661), but the conference was perceived to be less punitive (2.08 versus 1.76, P = 0.017). There was no difference between the perceived focus of the conference on systems (2.76 versus 2.76, P = 1.00) versus individual (4.21 versus 4.16, P = 0.644) errors. Most participants (59.5%) preferred that the conference remain anonymous.

CONCLUSIONS

We assessed the effect of anonymity in our departmental M&M conference for a 7-month period and found no difference in the perceived effect of M&M on the educational nature of the conference but found a small improvement in the punitive nature of the conference.

Reuniones de morbilidad y mortalidad, ¿una estrategia de aprendizaje?

Las reuniones o conferencias de morbilidad y mortalidad (M&M), una práctica común en todo el mundo, buscan evaluar los eventos adversos y las complicaciones relacionadas con la atención médica, desde una perspectiva académica y considerando un mejoramiento en la calidad de la atención hospitalaria. Sin embargo, en nuestro país, su ejecución es un desafío metodológico debido a la dificultad para su conceptualización, implementación, evaluación de su efectividad y utilidad como herramienta educativa; al estar carente de una estructura formalizada que considere estos temas. El objetivo de este trabajo es evaluar su papel desde una perspectiva académica individual e institucional, considerando diferentes teorías y modelos que podrían apoyar el M&M (teoría del aprendizaje experimental, teoría de la actividad en el aprendizaje sociocultural, cultura justa, teoría de la seguridad del modelo y teoría de la segunda víctima), con el fin de responder la pregunta: ¿son las reuniones de M&M una estrategia de aprendizaje? 

Mortality and morbidity rounds (MMR) in pathology: relative contribution of cognitive bias vs. systems failures to diagnostic error

Background Heuristics and cognitive biases are thought to play an important role in diagnostic medical error. How to systematically determine and capture these kinds of errors remains unclear. Morbidity and mortality rounds (MMRs) are generally focused on reducing medical error by identifying and correcting systems failures. However, they may also provide an educational platform for recognizing and raising awareness on cognitive errors. Methods A total of 49 MMR cases spanning the period 2008-2015 in our pathology department were examined for the presence of cognitive errors and/or systems failures by eight study participant raters who were trained on a subset of 16 of these MMR cases (excluded from the main study analysis) to identify such errors. The Delphi method was used to obtain group consensus on error classification on the remaining 33 study cases. Cases with <75% inter-rater agreement were subjected to subsequent rounds of Delphi analysis. Inter-rater agreement at each round was determined by Fleiss' kappa values. Results Thirty-six percent of the cases presented at our pathology MMRs over an 8-year period were found to contain errors likely due to cognitive bias. Conclusions These data suggest that the errors identified in our pathology MMRs represent not only systems failures but may also be composed of a significant proportion of cognitive errors. Teaching trainees and health professionals to correctly identify different types of cognitive errors may present an opportunity for quality improvement interventions in the interests of patient safety.

Identifying Patterns of Adverse Events of Solid Organ Transplantation Through Departmental Case Reviews

The best approach to adverse-event review in solid organ transplantation is unknown. We initiated a departmental case review (DCR) method based on root-cause analysis methods in a high-volume multiorgan transplant center. We aimed to describe this process and its contributions to process improvement.

Methods

Using our prospectively maintained transplant center quality portfolio, we performed a retrospective review of a 30-month period (October 26, 2015, to May 14, 2018) after DCR-process initiation at our center. We used univariate statistics to identify counts of adverse events, DCRs, death and graft-loss events, and quality improvement action-plan items identified during case review. We evaluated variation among organ groups in action-plan items, associated phase of transplant care, and quality improvement theme.

Results

Over 30 months, we performed 1449 transplant and living donor procedures with a total of 45 deaths and 31 graft losses; 91 DCRs were performed (kidney transplant n=43; liver transplant n=24; pancreas transplant n=10; heart transplant n=6; lung transplant n=3; living donor n=5). Seventy-nine action-plan items were identified across improvement domains, including errors in clinical decision making, communication, compliance, documentation, selection, waitlist management, and administrative processes. Median time to review was 83 days and varied significantly by program. Median time to action-plan item completion was 9 weeks. Clinical decision making in the pretransplant phase was identified as an improvement opportunity in all programs.

Conclusions

DCRs provide a robust approach to transplant adverse-event review. Quality improvement targets and domains may vary based on adverse-event profiles.

Quantifying recall bias in surgical safety: a need for a modern approach to morbidity and mortality reviews

Background

Despite recent investments into reducing errors and adverse events in health care, methods for quality improvement in surgery are outdated and ineffective. Most current efforts in this field are centred around morbidity and mortality conferences (MMCs), which have remained unchanged for over 100 years. The present study aimed to quantify the recall bias associated with details from surgical cases.

Methods

We gathered immediate postoperative questionnaires from 1 surgeon, 1 fellow and 11 trainees following 25 routine surgical cases. Information elicited included their perceived level of concentration, mental preparedness and assessment of whether the procedure deviated from its expected course, including any intraoperative adverse events. We readministered the questionnaire 7−9 days later to assess participants’ ability to recall important aspects of the procedure.

Results

After 1 week, members of the surgical team were universally inaccurate in their recollection of even major details from the operating room. Although most participants felt mentally prepared and perceived no issues with concentration during the case, all participants misclassified operations as having been performed with or without adverse events in almost every included case.

Conclusion

Our findings show that recall bias regarding surgical safety events is exceedingly common. This likely has a major impact on the integrity of data presented at MMCs.

The Swiss Cheese Conference: Integrating and Aligning Quality Improvement Education With Hospital Patient Safety Initiatives

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires integration of quality improvement and patient safety education into graduate medical education (GME). The authors created a novel "Swiss Cheese Conference" to bridge the gap between GME and hospital patient safety initiatives. Residents investigate a specific patient safety event and lead a monthly multidisciplinary conference about the case. Resident presenters introduce the Swiss cheese model, present the case and their findings, and teach a patient safety topic. In groups, participants identify contributing factors and discuss how to prevent similar events. Presenters and stakeholders immediately huddle to identify next steps. The Swiss Cheese Conference has increased participants' comfort analyzing safety issues from a systems perspective, utilizing the electronic reporting system, and launching patient safety initiatives. The Swiss Cheese Conference is a successful multidisciplinary model that engages GME trainees by integrating resident-led, case-based quality improvement education with creation of patient safety initiatives.

Lessons Learned From the Surgical Morbidity and Mortality Conference

OBJECTIVE

The Morbidity and Mortality (M&M) conference is both a quality improvement and an educational conference. We sought to evaluate the educational and quality improvement value of different learners who attend the surgical M&M conference. Furthermore, we sought to evaluate if an educational intervention directed at medical students (MS) would improve their experience at this conference.

DESIGN

Over a 2-month period, we used a third party, real-time audience polling software during 4 M&M conferences using questions concerning medical error, loop closure, learning value, applicability, and professionalism. After baseline data were obtained in Phase 1, MS attended a seminar on the subject of error as part of their orientation. Additionally, to facilitate their preparation, MS were supplied the cases to be presented at that week's conference, a few days before M&M. After this intervention, 3 additional M&M conferences were polled, as described above, as part of Phase 2. Differences between faculty (FAC) and MS experience were assessed by chi-square and ANOVA analyses as appropriate. Study was reviewed and received a waiver from the IRB.

SETTING

Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island, a tertiary care academic teaching hospital of Brown University.

PARTICIPANTS

Audience participants were informed of the voluntary nature of this survey and asked to self-identify as MS, PA/NPs, junior residents, senior residents, or FAC. In phase 1, there were an average of 289 ± 18.7 responses per session, while in phase 2 there were an average of 267 ± 9.29 responses per session.

RESULTS

In Phase 1, when asked to characterize the error as practitioner, system, both practitioner and system or neither, FAC were more likely to assign error as practitioner error than MS (15/38 - 39.5% vs 6/41 - 14.6%, p = 0.021). This trend continued in Phase 2, FAC (19/33 - 57.6%) vs MS (8/29 - 27.6%), p = 0.011. In terms of whether learners felt the conference was useful to their education (5 point scale - strongly agree to strongly disagree) the FAC felt conference more useful than MS (4.0 vs 3.63 p = 0.005). This trend continued even after intervention (4.24 vs 3.71 p < 0.001). The FAC and MS had the same opinion as to the closure of the case being "education at conference," change in policy/procedure, both, neither, no response - average: 75, 3, 9, 6, 7%. Both the FAC and the MS felt the environment was professional (Phase 1: 4.42 v 4.18, p = 0.321)(Phase 2: 4.43 v 4.37, p = 0.1002).

CONCLUSION

Despite an educational intervention, we found FAC and MS maintained very divergent opinions as to what is practitioner error, and system error, and FAC found the M&M discussion more educational than MS. To maximize learning for MS during surgical M&M more interventions are needed.

Chief physicians’ perceived need for improvement of morbidity and mortality conferences: the role of structural and procedural characteristics

Background

Mortality and morbidity conferences (M&MCs) are used to retrospectively discuss adverse events. Recently, the focus of the M&MC shifted from a clinical learning tool to a forum for analysing events using systems-based approaches. The aim of this study was to explore the M&MC characteristics that are associated with perceived improvement needs reported by chief physicians.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey among chief physicians assessed characteristics of currently implemented M&MCs in Switzerland (44 items). A summative score was developed covering information on procedural and structural characteristics commonly recommended for design of M&MCs.

Results

Of 223 participants, 145 (65%) indicated that their M&MC could be improved. Regression analysis revealed that the score (ie, the sum of structural and procedural features of the M&MC) was associated with self-perceived need for improvement of M&MCs (OR=0.73, CI 0.62 to 0.85, P<0.001). Chief physicians who explicitly select cases for M&MC discussion which involve problems in cooperation had twice the odds of reporting a need for improvement (OR=1.99, CI 1.05 to 3.74, P=0.034).

Conclusion

Our study provides important insights into the factors contributing to chief physicians’ evaluation of M&MCs. Offering support for addressing the procedural and structural features of the M&MCs may be a good lever to improve them.

Effects of efforts to optimise morbidity and mortality rounds to serve contemporary quality improvement and educational goals: a systematic review

Background

The quality and safety movement has reinvigorated interest in optimising morbidity and mortality (M&M) rounds. We performed a systematic review to identify effective means of updating M&M rounds to (1) identify and address quality and safety issues, and (2) address contemporary educational goals.

Methods

Relevant databases (Medline, Embase, PubMed, Education Resource Information Centre, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Healthstar, and Global Health) were searched to identify primary sources. Studies were included if they (1) investigated an intervention applied to M&M rounds, (2) reported outcomes relevant to the identification of quality and safety issues, or educational outcomes relevant to quality improvement (QI), patient safety or general medical education and (3) included a control group. Study quality was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale-Education instruments. Given the heterogeneity of interventions and outcome measures, results were analysed thematically.

Results

The final analysis included 19 studies. We identified multiple effective strategies (updating objectives, standardising elements of rounds and attaching rounds to a formal quality committee) to optimise M&M rounds for a QI/safety purpose. These efforts were associated with successful integration of quality and safety content into rounds, and increased implementation of QI interventions. Consistent effects on educational outcomes were difficult to identify, likely due to the use of methodologies ill-fitted for educational research.

Conclusions

These results are encouraging for those seeking to optimise the quality and safety mission of M&M rounds. However, the inability to identify consistent educational effects suggests the investigation of M&M rounds could benefit from additional methodologies (qualitative, mixed methods) in order to understand the complex mechanisms driving learning at M&M rounds.

The Effect of Medical Recording Training on Quantity and Quality of Recording in Gynecology Residents of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences

Introduction: Medical records contain valuable information about a patient's medical history and treatment. Patient safety is one of the most important dimensions of health care quality assurance and performance improvement. Completing the process of documentation is necessary to continue patient care and continuous quality improvement of basic services. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of medical recording education on the quantity and quality of recording in gynecology residents of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences.

Methods: This study is a quasi-experimental study and was conducted at Al-Zahra Teaching Hospital, Tabriz, Iran, in 2016. Thirty-two second through fourth year gynecologic residents of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences who were willing to participate in the study were included by census sampling and participated in training workshop. Three evaluators reviewed the residents’ records before and after training course by a checklist. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 13 software. P-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results: The results showed that before the intervention, there were significant differences in the quantity of information status among the evaluators and no significant difference was observed in the recording of qualitative status. After the workshop, among the 3 evaluators, there were also significant differences in the quantity of data recording status; however, no significant change was observed in recording of qualitative status.

Conclusion: The study findings revealed that a sectional training course of correct and standardized medical records has no effect on reforming the process of recording.

The role of morbidity and mortality rounds in medical education: a scoping review

CONTEXT

There is increasing focus on how health care professionals can be trained effectively in quality improvement and patient safety principles. The morbidity and mortality round (MMR) has often been used as a tool with which to examine and teach care quality, yet little is known of its implementation and educational outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this scoping review are to examine and summarise the literature on how the MMR is designed and delivered, and to identify how it is evaluated for effectiveness in addressing medical education outcomes.

METHODS

A literature search of the PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycInfo and Cochrane Library databases was conducted for articles published from 1980 to 1 June 2016. Publications in English describing the design, implementation and evaluation of MMRs were included. A total of 67 studies were identified, including eight survey-based studies, four literature reviews, one ethnographic study, three opinion papers, two qualitative observation studies and 49 case studies of education programmes with or without formal evaluation. Study outcomes were categorised using Donald Moore's framework for the evaluation of continuing medical education (CME).

RESULTS

There is much heterogeneity within the literature regarding the implementation, delivery and goals of the MMR. Common design components included explicit programme goals and objectives, the case selection process, case presentation models and some form of case analysis. Evaluation of CME outcomes for MMR were mainly limited to learner participation, satisfaction and self-assessed changes in knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

The MMR is widely utilised as an educational tool to promote medical education, patient safety and quality improvement. Although evidence to guide the design and implementation of the MMR to achieve measurable CME outcomes remains limited, there are components associated with positive improvements to learning and performance outcomes.