Intended and unintended effects of large-scale adverse event disclosure: a controlled before-after analysis of five large-scale notifications

Risk Communication After Health Care Exposures: An Experimental Vignette Survey With Patients

Purpose. We investigated how health care systems should communicate with patients about possible exposures to blood-borne pathogens that may have occurred during their care. Our goal was to determine how best to communicate uncertain risk information in a way that would minimize harm to patients, maintain their trust, and encourage patients to seek follow-up treatment. Methods. Participants (N = 1103) were randomized to receive one of six vignette surveys; 997 (98.4%) responded. All vignettes described the same event, but differed by risk level and recommendations (lower risk v. higher risk) and by communication mode (telephone, letter, social media). We measured participants’ perceived risk of blood-borne infection, trust in the health care system, and shared decision making about next clinical steps. Open-ended questions were analyzed using grounded thematic analysis. Results. When the vignette requested patients to undergo testing and practice certain health behaviors (higher risk), participants’ likelihood of seeking follow-up testing for blood-borne pathogens and their understanding of health issues increased. Perceived trust was unaffected by risk level or communication processes. Qualitative data indicated a desire for telephone communication from providers known to the patient. Limitations. It is not clear whether higher risk language or objective risk levels in vignettes motivated patients’ behavioral intentions. Conclusion. Using higher risk language when disclosing large-scale adverse events increased participants’ willingness to seek follow-up care. Implications. Health care organizations’ disclosures should focus on the next steps to take after health care exposures. This communication should involve helping patients to understand their personal health issues better, make them feel that they know which steps to take following the receipt of this information, and encouraging them to seek follow-up infectious disease testing in order to better take care of themselves.

From implementation to sustainment: A large-scale adverse event disclosure support program generated through embedded research in the Veterans Health Administration

In 2008, the Veterans Health Administration published a groundbreaking policy on disclosing large-scale adverse events to patients in order to promote transparent communication in cases where harm may not be obvious or even certain. Without embedded research, the evidence on whether or not implementation of this policy was generating more harm than good among Veteran patients was unknown. Through an embedded research-operations partnership, we conducted four research projects that led to the development of an evidence-based large-scale disclosure toolkit and disclosure support program, and its implementation across VA healthcare. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we identified specific activities corresponding to planning, engaging, executing, reflecting and evaluating phases in the process of implementation. These activities included planning with operational leaders to establish a shared research agenda; engaging with stakeholders to discuss early results, establishing buy-in of our efforts and receiving feedback; joining existing operational teams to execute the toolkit implementation; partnering with clinical operations to evaluate the toolkit during real-time disclosures; and redesigning the toolkit to meet stakeholders' needs. Critical lessons learned for implementation success included a need for stakeholder collaboration and engagement, an organizational culture involving a strong belief in evidence, a willingness to embed researchers in clinical operation activities, allowing for testing and evaluation of innovative practices, and researchers open to constructive feedback. At the conclusion of the research, VA operations worked with the researchers to continue to support efforts to spread, scale-up and sustain toolkit use across the VA healthcare system, with the final goal to establish long-term sustainability.

National Media Coverage of the Veterans Affairs Waitlist Scandal: Effects on Veterans' Distrust of the VA Health Care System

BACKGROUND

On April 23, 2014, US media outlets broadcast reports of excessive wait times and "secret" waitlists at some Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals, precipitating legislation to increase Veterans' access to private sector health care.

OBJECTIVE

The aims were to assess changes in Veterans' distrust in the VA health care system before and after the media coverage and explore sex and racial/ethnic differences in the temporal patterns.

METHODS

Veterans completed semistructured interviews on health care satisfaction from June 2013 to January 2015, including a validated scale of health system distrust (range: 1-5). We used linear splines with knots at 90-day intervals to assess changes in distrust before and after April 23, 2014 ("day 0") in linear mixed models. To explore sex and racial/ethnic differences in temporal patterns, we stratified models by sex and tested for interactions of race/ethnicity with time.

RESULTS

For women (n=600), distrust scores (mean=2.09) increased by 0.45 in days 0-90 (P<0.01), then decreased by 0.45 in days 90-180 (P<0.01). Among men (n=575), distrust scores (mean=2.05) increased by 0.18 in days 0-90 (P=0.059). Distrust levels were significantly higher for Black versus White women (time adjusted mean difference=0.21) and for Black and Hispanic versus White men (differences=0.26 and 0.18). However, the temporal patterns did not vary by race/ethnicity for women or men (interaction P=0.85 and 0.21, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Health system distrust increased in women following media coverage of VA access problems and was higher in Black/Hispanic versus White Veterans at all time periods. Such perceptions could influence Veteran decisions to seek health care in the community rather than VA.

Events Associated With Changes in Reliance on the Veterans Health Administration Among Medicare-eligible Veterans

OBJECTIVES

We can learn something about how Veterans value the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) versus community providers by observing Veterans' choices between VHA and Medicare providers after they turn 65. For a cohort of Veterans who were newly age-eligible for Medicare, we estimated the change in VHA reliance (VHA outpatient visits divided by total VHA and Medicare visits) associated with specific events: receiving a life-threatening diagnosis, having a Medicare-paid hospitalization, or moving further from the VHA.

RESEARCH DESIGN

A longitudinal cohort study of VHA and Medicare administrative data.

SUBJECTS

A total of 5932 VHA users who completed a health survey in 1999 and became age-eligible for Medicare from 1998 to 2000 were followed through 2016.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

More Veterans chose to rely on the VHA than Medicare (64% vs. 36.%). For a VHA-reliant Veteran, a Medicare-paid hospital stay was associated with a decrease of 7.8 percentage points (pps) (P<0.001) in VHA reliance in the subsequent 12 months, but by 36 months reliance increased to near prehospitalization levels (-1.5 pps; P=0.138). Moving further from the VHA, or receiving a diagnosis of cancer, heart failure, or renal failure had no significant association with subsequent VHA reliance; however, a diagnosis of dementia was associated with a decrease in VHA reliance (-8.6 pps; P=0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

A significant majority of newly Medicare-eligible VHA users voted with their feet in favor of sustaining the VHA as a provider of comprehensive medical care for Veterans. These VHA-reliant Veterans maintained their reliance even after receiving a life-threatening diagnosis, and after experiencing Medicare-provided hospital care.

Exploring the Association Between Organizational Culture and Large-Scale Adverse Events: Evidence from the Veterans Health Administration

BACKGROUND

Large-scale adverse events (LSAEs) involve unsafe clinical practices stemming from system issues that may affect multiple patients. Although literature suggests a supportive organizational culture may protect against system-related adverse events, no study has explored such a relationship within the context of LSAEs. This study aimed to identify whether staff perceptions of organizational culture were associated with LSAE incidence.

METHODS

The team conducted an exploratory analysis using the 2008-2010 data from the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) All Employee Survey (AES). LSAE incidence was the outcome variable in two facilities where similar infection control practice issues occurred, leading to LSAEs. For comparison, four facilities where LSAEs had not occurred were selected, matched on VA-assigned facility complexity and geography. The AES explanatory factors included workgroup-level (civility, employee engagement, leadership, psychological safety, resources, rewards) and hospital-level Likert-type scales for four cultural factors (group, rational, entrepreneurial, bureaucratic). Bivariate analyses and logistic regressions were performed, with individual staff as the unit of analysis from the anonymous AES data.

RESULTS

Responses from 209 AES participants across the six facilities in the sample indicated that the four comparison facilities had significantly higher mean scores compared to the two LSAE facilities for 9 of 10 explanatory factors. The adjusted analyses identified that employee engagement significantly predicted LSAE incidence (odds ratio = 0.58, 95% confidence interval = 0.37-0.90).

CONCLUSION

Staff at the two exposure facilities in this study described their organizational culture to be less supportive. Lower scores in employee engagement may be a contributing factor for LSAEs.

Association of open communication and the emotional and behavioural impact of medical error on patients and families: state-wide cross-sectional survey

Background

How openly healthcare providers communicate after a medical error may influence long-term impacts. We sought to understand whether greater open communication is associated with fewer persisting emotional impacts, healthcare avoidance and loss of trust.

Methods

Cross-sectional 2018 recontact survey assessing experience with medical error in a 2017 random digit dial survey of Massachusetts residents. Two hundred and fifty-three respondents self-reported medical error. Respondents were similar to non-respondents in sociodemographics confirming minimal response bias. Time since error was categorised as <1, 1–2 or 3–6 years before interview. Open communication was measured with six questions assessing different communication elements. Persistent impacts included emotional (eg, sadness, anger), healthcare avoidance (specific providers or all medical care) and loss of trust in healthcare. Logistic regressions examined the association between open communication and long-term impacts.

Results

Of respondents self-reporting a medical error 3–6 years ago, 51% reported at least one current emotional impact; 57% reported avoiding doctor/facilities involved in error; 67% reported loss of trust. Open communication varied: 34% reported no communication and 24% reported ≥5 elements. Controlling for error severity, respondents reporting the most open communication had significantly lower odds of persisting sadness (OR=0.17, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.60, p=0.006), depression (OR=0.16, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.77, p=0.022) or feeling abandoned/betrayed (OR=0.10, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.48, p=0.004) compared with respondents reporting no communication. Open communication significantly predicted less doctor/facility avoidance, but was not associated with medical care avoidance or healthcare trust.

Conclusions

Negative emotional impacts from medical error can persist for years. Open communication is associated with reduced emotional impacts and decreased avoidance of doctors/facilities involved in the error. Communication and resolution programmes could facilitate transparent conversations and reduce some of the negative impacts of medical error.

Evaluating the implementation of a national disclosure policy for large-scale adverse events in an integrated health care system: identification of gaps and successes

BACKGROUND

Many healthcare organizations have developed disclosure policies for large-scale adverse events, including the Veterans Health Administration (VA). This study evaluated VA's national large-scale disclosure policy and identifies gaps and successes in its implementation.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with leaders, hospital employees, and patients at nine sites to elicit their perceptions of recent large-scale adverse events notifications and the national disclosure policy. Data were coded using the constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

RESULTS

We conducted 97 interviews. Insights included how to handle the communication of large-scale disclosures through multiple levels of a large healthcare organization and manage ongoing communications about the event with employees. Of the 5 CFIR constructs and 26 sub-constructs assessed, seven were prominent in interviews. Leaders and employees specifically mentioned key problem areas involving 1) networks and communications during disclosure, 2) organizational culture, 3) engagement of external change agents during disclosure, and 4) a need for reflecting on and evaluating the policy implementation and disclosure itself. Patients shared 5) preferences for personal outreach by phone in place of the current use of certified letters. All interviewees discussed 6) issues with execution and 7) costs of the disclosure.

CONCLUSIONS

CFIR analysis reveals key problem areas that need to be addresses during disclosure, including: timely communication patterns throughout the organization, establishing a supportive culture prior to implementation, using patient-approved, effective communications strategies during disclosures; providing follow-up support for employees and patients, and sharing lessons learned.