Validation of triggers and development of a pediatric trigger tool to identify adverse events

Development and validation of trigger tools in primary care: A scoping review

In primary care, trigger tools have been utilized to evaluate and identify patient safety events. The use of trigger tools could help clinicians and patients detect adverse events in a patient's medical record. Due to a lack of research on the process development of trigger tools in primary care, the purpose of this scoping review is to investigate the trigger development and validation process in primary care settings. A scoping review methodology was used to map the published literature using the Joanna Briggs Methodology of performing scoping review. We considered only studies published in English in the last five years and included both qualitative and quantitative study designs. The final review included five articles. The primary care and combined primary-secondary care studies are included to gain more knowledge in the process development and validation of trigger tools. The trigger tool development process begins with clearly defining the triggers, which are then programmed into a combined computerized algorithm. The validation process was then carried out in two steps by both physician and non-physician experts for content and concurrent validity. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of the final algorithm were critical in determining the validity of each trigger. This study provided a comprehensive guide to developing trigger tools, emphasizing the importance of precisely defining triggers through a thorough literature review and dual validation process. There were similarities in the development and validation of trigger tools across primary care and hospital settings, allowing primary care to learn from hospital settings.

Adaption of a trigger tool to identify harmful incidents, no harm incidents, and near misses in prehospital emergency care of children

BACKGROUND

The emergency medical service (EMS) addresses all chief complaints across all ages in various contexts. Children in EMS present a particular challenge due to their unique anatomical and physical properties, which require specific training that EMS clinicians often report lacking. This combination exposes children to incidents threatening patient safety. The most common method to highlight incidents is the incident reporting system. Studies have shown underreporting of such incidents, highlighting the need for multiple methods to measure and enhance patient safety in EMS for children. Thus, the aim of this study was to modify and adapt the current Ambulance TT for road-based EMS (ATT) to a pediatric version (pATT) with a guide containing definitions of triggers.

METHODS

The adaption of the ambulance trigger tool to a version suitable for children followed a stepwise manner, including (1) a review of previous literature to pinpoint areas of risk regarding patient safety among children in EMS. (2) Three sessions of expert panel discussions via video meetings were held to evaluate each trigger of the ATT in terms of clinical relevance, comprehensibility, language and areas of risk regarding patient safety among children in EMS. (3) Clinical use of the pATT along with Retrospective Record Review (RRR). (4) Calculation of Item-level validity index and positive predictive value (PPV) for each trigger. (5) calculate inter-rater reliability between two independent record reviewers.

RESULTS

The literature search revealed 422 respective 561 articles in Cinahl and Medline where headlines and abstracts were read to identify areas posing risks to patient safety in EMS for children. During the structured discussions, one trigger was added to the existing 19 derived from the ATT, and the trigger definitions were modified to suit children. The three most common triggers identified in the 900 randomly selected records were deviation from treatment guidelines (63.9%), incomplete documentation (48.3%), and the patient is non conveyed after EMS assessment (41.1%). The positive triggers were categorized into near miss (54.6%), no harm incident (5.8%), and harmful incident (0.4%). Inter-rater reliability testing showed excellent agreement.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the adaptation of an existing trigger tool (ATT) to one suitable for children. It also shows that the trigger tool, along with retrospective record review, is a feasible method to evaluate patient safety in EMS, thus complementing existing methods.

Development of a trigger tool to identify harmful incidents, no harm incidents, and near misses in prehospital emergency care

BACKGROUND

Emergency Medical Services (EMS) are a unique setting because care for the chief complaint is given across all ages in a complex and high-risk environment that may pose a threat to patient safety. Traditionally, a reporting system is commonly used to raise awareness of adverse events (AEs); however, it could fail to detect an AE. Several methods are needed to evaluate patient safety in EMS. In this light, this study was conducted to (1) develop a national ambulance trigger tool (ATT) with a guide containing descriptions of triggers, examples of use, and categorization of near misses (NMs), no harm incidents (NHIs), and harmful incidents (HIs) and (2) use the ATT on randomly selected ambulance records.

METHODS

The ambulance trigger tool was developed in a stepwise manner through (1) a literature review; (2) three sessions of structured group discussions with an expert panel having knowledge of emergency medical service, patient safety, and development of trigger tools; (3) a retrospective record review of 900 randomly selected journals with three review teams from different geographical locations; and (4) inter-rater reliability testing between reviewers.

RESULTS

From the literature review, 34 triggers were derived. After removing clinically irrelevant ones and combining others through three sessions of structured discussions, 19 remained. The most common triggers identified in the 900 randomly selected records were deviation from treatment guidelines (30.4%), the patient is non conveyed after EMS assessment (20.8%), and incomplete documentation (14.4%). The positive triggers were categorized as a near miss (40.9%), no harm (3.7%), and harmful incident (0.2%). Inter-rater reliability testing showed good agreement in both sessions.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that a trigger tool together with a retrospective record review can be used as a method to measure the frequency of harmful incidents, no harm incidents, and near misses in the EMS, thus complementing the traditional reporting system to realize increased patient safety.

Analysis of adverse events in general surgery. Multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

Knowledge of adverse events (AE) in acute care hospitals is a particularly relevant aspect of patient safety. Its incidence ranges from 3% to 17%, and surgery is related to the occurrence of 46%-65% of all AE.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An observational, descriptive, retrospective, multicenter study was conducted with the participation of 31 Spanish acute-care hospitals to determine and analyze AE in general surgery services.

RESULTS

The prevalence of AE was 31.53%. The most frequent types of AE were infectious (35%). Higher ASA grades, greater complexity and urgent-type admission are factors associated with the presence of AE. The majority of patients (58.42%) were attributed a category F event (temporary harm to the patient requiring initial or prolonged hospitalization); 14.69% of AE were considered severe, while 34.22% of AE were considered preventable.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of AE in General and GI Surgery (GGIS) patients is high. Most AE were infectious, and the most frequent AE was surgical site infection. Higher ASA grades, greater complexity and urgent-type admission are factors associated with the presence of AE. Most detected AE resulted in mild or moderate harm to the patients. About one-third of AE were preventable.

Validation of a Reduced Set of High-Performance Triggers for Identifying Patient Safety Incidents with Harm in Primary Care: TriggerPrim Project

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to construct and validate a reduced set of high-performance triggers for identifying adverse events (AEs) via electronic medical records (EMRs) review in primary care (PC).

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional descriptive study for validating a diagnostic test. The study included all 262 PC centers of Madrid region (Spain). Patients were older than 18 years who attended their PC center over the last quarter of 2018. The randomized sample was n = 1797. Main measurements were as follows: ( a ) presence of each of 19 specific computer-identified triggers in the EMR and ( b ) occurrence of an AE. To collect data, EMR review was conducted by 3 doctor-nurse teams. Triggers with statistically significant odds ratios for identifying AEs were selected for the final set after adjusting for age and sex using logistic regression.

RESULTS

The sensitivity (SS) and specificity (SP) for the selected triggers were: ≥3 appointments in a week at the PC center (SS = 32.3% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 22.8%-41.8%]; SP = 92.8% [95% CI, 91.6%-94.0%]); hospital admission (SS = 19.4% [95% CI, 11.4%-27.4%]; SP = 97.2% [95% CI, 96.4%-98.0%]); hospital emergency department visit (SS = 31.2% [95% CI, 21.8%-40.6%]; SP = 90.8% [95% CI, 89.4%-92.2%]); major opioids prescription (SS = 2.2% [95% CI, 0.0%-5.2%]; SP = 99.8% [95% CI, 99.6%-100%]); and chronic benzodiazepine treatment in patients 75 years or older (SS = 14.0% [95% CI, 6.9%-21.1%]; SP = 95.5% [95% CI, 94.5%-96.5%]).The following values were obtained in the validation of this trigger set (the occurrence of at least one of these triggers in the EMR): SS = 60.2% (95% CI, 50.2%-70.1%), SP = 80.8% (95% CI, 78.8%-82.6%), positive predictive value = 14.6% (95% CI, 11.0%-18.1%), negative predictive value = 97.4% (95% CI, 96.5%-98.2%), positive likelihood ratio = 3.13 (95% CI, 2.3-4.2), and negative likelihood ratio = 0.49 (95% CI, 0.3-0.7).

CONCLUSIONS

The set containing the 5 selected triggers almost triples the efficiency of EMR review in detecting AEs. This suggests that this set is easily implementable and of great utility in risk-management practice.

Adverse events in the postoperative period of cardiac surgery in a pediatric intensive care unit: the contribution of the VIS score and the RACHS-1

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the occurrence of adverse events in the postoperative period of cardiac surgery in a pediatric intensive care unit and to find any patient characteristics that can predict such events.

METHODS

This was a historical cohort study of patients recovering in the pediatric intensive care unit for the first 7 days after cardiac surgery between April and December 2019, by reviewing the medical records. The following were reviewed: demographic, clinical, and laboratory characteristics; patient severity scores; and selected adverse events, grouped into device-related, surgical, and nonsurgical.

RESULTS

A total of 238 medical records were included. At least one adverse event occurred in 110 postoperative patients (46.2%). The total number of adverse events was 193 (81%). Vascular catheters were the most common cause, followed by cardiac arrest, bleeding, and surgical reexploration. In the univariate analysis, the vasoactive-inotropic score (VIS), Risk Adjustment in Congenital Heart Surgery (RACHS-1) score, age, Pediatric Index of Mortality (PIM-2), cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic clamping duration were significantly associated with adverse events. In the multivariate analysis, VIS ≥ 20 (OR 2.90; p = 0.004) and RACHS-1 ≥ 3 (OR 2.11; p = 0.019) were significant predictors, while age and delayed sternal closure showed only trends toward significance. To predict the occurrence of adverse events from VIS and RACHS-1, the area under the curve was 0.73 (95%CI 0.66 - 0.79).

CONCLUSION

Adverse events were quite frequent in children after cardiac surgery, especially those related to devices. The VIS and RACHS-1, used together, predicted the occurrence of adverse events well in this pediatric sample.

Incidence and characteristics of adverse events in paediatric inpatient care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Adverse events (AEs) cause suffering for hospitalised children, a fragile patient group where the delivery of adequate timely care is of great importance.

OBJECTIVE

To report the incidence and characteristics of AEs, in paediatric inpatient care, as detected with the Global Trigger Tool (GTT), the Trigger Tool (TT) or the Harvard Medical Practice Study (HMPS) method.

METHOD

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar were searched from inception to June 2021, without language restrictions. Studies using manual record review were included if paediatric data were reported separately. We excluded studies reporting: AEs for a specific disease/diagnosis/treatment/procedure, or deceased patients; study protocols with no AE outcomes; conference abstracts, editorials and systematic reviews; clinical incident reports as the primary data source; and studies focusing on specific AEs only. Methodological risk of bias was assessed using a tool based on the Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2. Primary outcome was the percentage of admissions with ≥1 AEs. All statistical analyses were stratified by record review methodology (GTT/TT or HMPS) and by type of population. Meta-analyses, applying random-effects models, were carried out. The variability of the pooled estimates was characterised by 95% prediction intervals (PIs).

RESULTS

We included 32 studies from 44 publications, conducted in 15 countries totalling 33 873 paediatric admissions. The total number of AEs identified was 8577. The most common types of AEs were nosocomial infections (range, 6.8%-59.6%) for the general care population and pulmonary-related (10.5%-36.7%) for intensive care. The reported incidence rates were highly heterogeneous. The PIs for the primary outcome were 3.8%-53.8% and 6.9%-91.6% for GTT/TT studies (general and intensive care population). The equivalent PI was 0.3%-33.7% for HMPS studies (general care). The PIs for preventable AEs were 7.4%-96.2% and 4.5%-98.9% for GTT/TT studies (general and intensive care population) and 10.4%-91.8% for HMPS studies (general care). The quality assessment indicated several methodological concerns regarding the included studies.

CONCLUSION

The reported incidence of AEs is highly variable in paediatric inpatient care research, and it is not possible to estimate a reliable single rate. Poor reporting standards and methodological differences hinder the comparison of study results.

Estonian adverse events study for multimorbid patients using Estonian Trigger Tool (MUPETT-MUltimorbid Patients-Estonian Trigger Tool). Development of Estonian trigger tool for multimorbid patients. A study protocol for mixed-methods study

INTRODUCTION

It is widely recognized that providing healthcare may produce harm to the patient. Different approaches have been developed to measure the burden of adverse events (AEs) to plan and measure the effects of interventions. One of the most widely used instruments is the Trigger Tool, which has previously been modified to be used on various settings and translated into many languages. Multimorbidity complicates care and may increase the number of AEs patients experience. Currently there is no instrument designed to measure AEs in multimorbid patients. In Estonia, there is currently no validated instrument to measure the burden of AEs.

AIMS

The aim of this study will be evaluating the characteristics and ocurrence of AEs in multimorbid patients in hospitalised internal medicine patients of Estonia, and describes the development of a trigger tool for this purpose.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search for the evidence on measuring AEs in the population of multimorbid patients focusing on trigger tools, and synthesize the data. Data collection of the triggers from the literature will be followed by translating triggers from English to Estonian. An expert multidisciplinary panel will select the suitable triggers for this population. Trigger tool will be pre-tested to assess agreement among professionals and usability of the tool. Validation will be done using 90 medical records. A cross-sectional study in internal medicine departments of two Estonian tertiary care hospitals will be performed to identify the frequency and characteristics of AEs in 960 medical records. We will also provide preventability potential and influencing factors.

DISSEMINATION

Results will be disseminated to healthcare providers and stakeholders at national and international conferences, and as a doctoral medical thesis.

Variation in detected adverse events using trigger tools: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Adverse event (AE) detection is a major patient safety priority. However, despite extensive research on AEs, reported incidence rates vary widely.

Objective

This study aimed: (1) to synthesize available evidence on AE incidence in acute care inpatient settings using Trigger Tool methodology; and (2) to explore whether study characteristics and study quality explain variations in reported AE incidence.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

To identify relevant studies, we queried PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and three journals in the patient safety field (last update search 25.05.2022). Eligible publications fulfilled the following criteria: adult inpatient samples; acute care hospital settings; Trigger Tool methodology; focus on specialty of internal medicine, surgery or oncology; published in English, French, German, Italian or Spanish. Systematic reviews and studies addressing adverse drug events or exclusively deceased patients were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using an adapted version of the Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2. Our main outcome of interest was AEs per 100 admissions. We assessed nine study characteristics plus study quality as potential sources of variation using random regression models. We received no funding and did not register this review.

Results

Screening 6,685 publications yielded 54 eligible studies covering 194,470 admissions. The cumulative AE incidence was 30.0 per 100 admissions (95% CI 23.9–37.5; I² = 99.7%) and between study heterogeneity was high with a prediction interval of 5.4–164.7. Overall studies’ risk of bias and applicability-related concerns were rated as low. Eight out of nine methodological study characteristics did explain some variation of reported AE rates, such as patient age and type of hospital. Also, study quality did explain variation.

Conclusion

Estimates of AE studies using trigger tool methodology vary while explaining variation is seriously hampered by the low standards of reporting such as the timeframe of AE detection. Specific reporting guidelines for studies using retrospective medical record review methodology are necessary to strengthen the current evidence base and to help explain between study variation.

Development and Adjustment of an Algorithm for Identifying Drug-Related Hospital Admissions in Pediatrics

OBJECTIVE

Adverse drug events (ADEs) in the outpatient pediatric pharmacotherapy can be serious and lead to inpatient admissions. Recent research only focused on ADE identification during hospitalization. The aim of the present study was to develop an algorithm to identify drug-related hospital admissions in pediatrics.

METHODS

A systematic literature research was performed, and a pediatric trigger tool for identifying drug-related inpatient admissions was built. The initial version was tested in a sample of 292 patients admitted to a German university children's hospital. Subsequently, the tool was further improved by combining different modules as a novel approach.

RESULTS

The obtained algorithm with 39 triggers in 5 modules identified drug-related inpatient admissions at a sensitivity of 95.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.3%-100%) and a specificity of 16.5% (95% CI, 11.9%-21.2%), respectively. After modifications including trigger activation requiring a combination of different modules, specificity increased to 56.9% (95% CI, 50.7%-63.0%). Identifying 36 of 44 ADEs leading to admission, sensitivity remained high (81.8% [95% CI, 70.4%-93.2%]). The overall positive predictive value was 25.2% (95% CI, 18.1%-32.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

The algorithm is the first trigger tool to identify ambulant acquired ADEs leading to hospital admission in pediatrics. However, the underlying patient sample is small.Using a larger population for refinement will allow further specifications and reduction in the total amount of triggers and thus signals.

Associations between safety outcomes and communication practices among pediatric nurses in the United States

PURPOSE

To gain a deeper understanding of RNs communication related to patient safety.

RESEARCH AIMS

To determine: (1) the associations between the communication of registered nurses (RNs) within their health care teams and the frequency that they reported safety events; (2) the associations between RNs' communication within their health care teams and their perceptions of safety within the hospital unit; and (3) whether RNs' communication had improved from 2016 to 2018.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND METHODS

We used the United Kingdom's Safety Culture model as the theoretical framework for this study. Our secondary data analysis from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture included 2016 (n = 5298) and 2018 (n = 3476) using multiple regression models to determine associations between responses for Communication Openness and Feedback & Communication About Error, and outcome responses for Frequency of Events Reported and Overall Perceptions of Safety.

RESULTS

Our findings were: 1). In both 2016 and 2018 datasets, Feedback About Error had a greater impact on Reporting Frequency than Open Communication; 2). Feedback About Error had a greater impact on Safety Perceptions than Open Communication; 3). Open Communication and Feedback About Error and their associations with Reporting Frequency and Safety Perceptions showed little change; and, 4). The proportion of variance was low, indicating factors other than Open Communication and Feedback About Error were involved with Reporting Frequency and Safety Perceptions.

CONCLUSION

Pediatric RNs' communication, reporting, and perceptions of patient safety have not improved. (245 words).

Occurrence of No-Harm Incidents and Adverse Events in Hospitalized Patients with Ischemic Stroke or TIA: A Cohort Study Using Trigger Tool Methodology

Adverse events (AEs)—healthcare caused events leading to patient harm or even death—are common in healthcare. Although it is a frequently investigated topic, systematic knowledge on this phenomenon in stroke patients is limited. To determine cumulative incidence of no-harm incidents and AEs, including their severity and preventability, a cohort study using trigger tool methodology for retrospective record review was designed. The study was carried out in a stroke center at a university hospital in the German speaking part of Switzerland. Electronic records from 150 randomly selected patient admissions for transient ischemic attack (TIA) or ischemic stroke, with or without acute recanalization therapy, were used. In total, 170 events (108 AEs and 62 no-harm incidents) were identified, affecting 83 patients (55.3%; 95% CI 47 to 63.4), corresponding to an event rate of 113 events/100 admissions or 142 events/1000 patient days. The three most frequent AEs were ischemic strokes (n = 12, 7.1%), urinary tract infections (n = 11, 6.5%) and phlebitis (n = 10, 5.9%). The most frequent no-harm incidents were medication events (n = 37, 21.8%). Preventability ranged from 12.5% for allergic reactions to 100% for medication events and pressure ulcers. Most of the events found (142; 83.5%; 95% CI 76.9 to 88.6) occurred throughout the whole stroke care. The remaining 28 events (16.5%; 95% CI 11.4 to 23.1) were detected during stroke care but were related to care outside the stroke pathway. Trigger tool methodology allows detection of AEs and no-harm incidents, showing a frequent occurrence of both event types in stroke and TIA patients. Further investigations into events’ relationships with organizational systems and processes will be needed, first to achieve a better understanding of these events’ underlying mechanisms and risk factors, then to determine efforts needed to improve patient safety.

Predictive Power of the "Trigger Tool" for the detection of adverse events in general surgery: a multicenter observational validation study

BACKGROUND

In spite of the global implementation of standardized surgical safety checklists and evidence-based practices, general surgery remains associated with a high residual risk of preventable perioperative complications and adverse events. This study was designed to validate the hypothesis that a new "Trigger Tool" represents a sensitive predictor of adverse events in general surgery.

METHODS

An observational multicenter validation study was performed among 31 hospitals in Spain. The previously described "Trigger Tool" based on 40 specific triggers was applied to validate the predictive power of predicting adverse events in the perioperative care of surgical patients. A prediction model was used by means of a binary logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The prevalence of adverse events among a total of 1,132 surgical cases included in this study was 31.53%. The "Trigger Tool" had a sensitivity and specificity of 86.27% and 79.55% respectively for predicting these adverse events. A total of 12 selected triggers of overall 40 triggers were identified for optimizing the predictive power of the "Trigger Tool".

CONCLUSIONS

The "Trigger Tool" has a high predictive capacity for predicting adverse events in surgical procedures. We recommend a revision of the original 40 triggers to 12 selected triggers to optimize the predictive power of this tool, which will have to be validated in future studies.

Validating a Trigger Tool for Detecting Adverse Drug Events in Elderly Patients With Multimorbidity (TRIGGER-CHRON)

PURPOSE

The aims of the study were to evaluate the performance of an initial list developed to detect adverse drug events (ADEs) in elderly patients with multimorbidity in clinical practice, to explore the possibility of shortening the list, and to use this tool to study the incidence and characteristics of the ADEs among this population.

METHODS

This observational study was conducted at 12 Spanish hospitals. A random sample of five charts from each hospital was selected weekly for retrospective review for a 12-week period. We included patients aged 65 years and older with multimorbidity, hospitalized more than 48 hours. Adverse drug events were detected using a list of 51 triggers previously selected by an expert panel by means of a modified Delphi method. The number of triggers identified and ADEs detected were recorded. The severity and preventability of the ADEs were evaluated. The positive predictive value (PPV) of each trigger was calculated and used to select the most efficient triggers.

RESULTS

In 720 charts reviewed, 1430 positive triggers were identified that led to detect 215 ADEs in 178 patients (24.7%), of which 13% were serious. One hundred nineteen ADEs (55.3%) were preventable and mainly related to inadequate treatment monitoring and prescribing errors. Triggers with a PPV of 5% or less were eliminated, resulting in a final list of 32 triggers (TRIGGER-CHRON) with a PPV of 22.1%, which accounted for 98.9% of all ADEs detected and 98.6% of the preventable ADEs.

CONCLUSIONS

The shorter final validated TRIGGER-CHRON tool is an efficient list for identifying ADEs in elderly patients with multimorbidity, detecting ADEs in one-fourth of hospitalized patients in internal medicine or geriatric units.

Expert Consensus on Currently Accepted Measures of Harm

BACKGROUND

Twenty-five years after the seminal work of the Harvard Medical Practice Study, the numbers and specific types of health care measures of harm have evolved and expanded. Using the World Café method to derive expert consensus, we sought to generate a contemporary list of triggers and adverse event measures that could be used for chart review to determine the current incidence of inpatient and outpatient adverse events.

METHODS

We held a modified World Café event in March 2018, during which content experts were divided into 10 tables by clinical domain. After a focused discussion of a prepopulated list of literature-based triggers and measures relevant to that domain, they were asked to rate each measure on clinical importance and suitability for chart review and electronic extraction (very low, low, medium, high, very high).

RESULTS

Seventy-one experts from 9 diverse institutions attended (primary acceptance rate, 72%). Of 525 total triggers and measures, 67% of 391 measures and 46% of 134 triggers were deemed to have high or very high clinical importance. For those triggers and measures with high or very high clinical importance, 218 overall were deemed to be highly amenable to chart review and 198 overall were deemed to be suitable for electronic surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

The World Café method effectively prioritized measures/triggers of high clinical importance including those that can be used in chart review, which is considered the gold standard. A future goal is to validate these measures using electronic surveillance mechanisms to decrease the need for chart review.

Adverse Events Detection Through Global Trigger Tool Methodology: Results From a 5-Year Study in an Italian Hospital and Opportunities to Improve Interrater Reliability

OBJECTIVE

Global Trigger Tool (GTT) has been proposed as a low-cost method to detect adverse events (AEs). The validity of the methodology has been questioned because of moderate interrater agreement. Continuous training has been suggested as a means to improve consistency over time. We present the main findings of the implementation of the Italian version of the GTT and evaluate efforts to improve the interrater reliability over time.

METHODS

The Italian version of the GTT was developed and implemented at the San Bonifacio Hospital, a 270-bed secondary care acute hospital in Verona, Italy. Ten clinical records randomly selected every 2 weeks were reviewed from 2009 to 2014. Two-stage interrater reliability assessment between team members was conducted on 2 subsamples of 50 clinical records before and after the implementation of specific review rules and staff training.

RESULTS

Among 1320 medical records reviewed, a total of 366 AEs were found with at least 1 AE on 20.2% of all discharges, 27.7 AEs/100 admissions, and 30.6 AEs/1000 patient-days. Adverse events with harm score E and F were respectively 58.2% (n = 213) and 38.8% (n = 142). First round interrater reliability was comparable with other international studies. The interrater agreement improved significantly after intervention (κ interrater I = 0.52, κ interrater II = 0.80, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the improvements in the interrater consistency, overall results did not show any significant trend in AEs over time. Future studies may be directed to apply and adapt the GTT methodology to more specific settings to explore how to improve its sensitivity.

Development of a Trigger Tool to Identify Adverse Drug Events in Elderly Patients With Multimorbidity

PURPOSE

Elderly patients with multimorbidity are especially vulnerable to adverse drug events (ADEs) and had high prevalence rates. Identifying ADEs is essential for enabling timely interventions that can mitigate the adverse events detected and for developing targeted strategies to prevent their occurrence as well as to monitor implementation. The aim of this study was to develop a set with appropriate triggers for detecting potential ADEs in elderly patients with multimorbidity.

METHODS

A modified Delphi methodology was used to reach consensus. Existing triggers for detecting ADEs in adult patients were identified from a literature search in several databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, and Cochrane Library) and from Institute for Healthcare Improvement published lists. Twelve experts in patient/medication safety or in chronic diseases scored candidate triggers for appropriateness according to 3 criteria (evidence, usefulness for elderly patients, and feasibility of implementation in clinical practice).

RESULTS

Seventy-two triggers were initially selected to be evaluated. The final set includes a total of 51 triggers for which the panelists who completed the 2 rounds of evaluation reached agreement. These triggers were organized into 5 modules: 11 as care module triggers, 10 as antidotes/treatment, 11 medication concentrations, 18 abnormal laboratory values, and 1 as emergency department trigger.

CONCLUSIONS

A set of triggers for detecting ADEs in elderly patients with multimorbidity have been developed, following the consensus of a panel of experts. Subsequent validation in clinical practice is needed to confirm the accuracy and efficiency of these triggers for this population.

Methods for the detection of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized children: a systematic review

Introduction: Adverse drug reactions (ADR) are a problem for healthcare systems worldwide. Pediatric patients constitute a vulnerable group with regard to ADRs. However, although pediatric patients are at increased risk for these reactions, there is little progress on ADR detection methods in this group.Areas covered: In this systematic search, performed according to PRISMA statements, we selected studies, published in PubMed/Medline databases; Scopus; LILACS; Web of Science; Embase and Cochrane Library until April, 2020, on ADRs in hospitalized pediatric patients.Expert opinion: The increase of pediatric drug safety data is essential to the improvement of childcare. Health services must continuously stimulate educational programs focused on ADR detection tools to minimize the barriers and raise awareness among professionals. Therefore, it is necessary to consider that each method has advantages and disadvantages and must be analyzed in detail to be implemented according to the peculiarities of each practice scenario. Triggers tools (active method) correlated with electronic medical notes seems a good strategy for ADR identification, whether pediatric parameters are well checked and adapted with each age group. In any event, combined methods will add data to identification and clearer ADR assessment.

Predicting Adverse Drug Events in Chinese Pediatric Inpatients With the Associated Risk Factors: A Machine Learning Study

The aim of this study was to apply machine learning methods to deeply explore the risk factors associated with adverse drug events (ADEs) and predict the occurrence of ADEs in Chinese pediatric inpatients. Data of 1,746 patients aged between 28 days and 18 years (mean age = 3.84 years) were included in the study from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2015, in the Children’s Hospital of Chongqing Medical University. There were 247 cases of ADE occurrence, of which the most common drugs inducing ADEs were antibacterials. Seven algorithms, including eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), CatBoost, AdaBoost, LightGBM, Random Forest (RF), Gradient Boosting Decision Tree (GBDT), and TPOT, were used to select the important risk factors, and GBDT was chosen to establish the prediction model with the best predicting abilities (precision = 44%, recall = 25%, F1 = 31.88%). The GBDT model has better performance than Global Trigger Tools (GTTs) for ADE prediction (precision 44 vs. 13.3%). In addition, multiple risk factors were identified via GBDT, such as the number of trigger true (TT) (+), number of doses, BMI, number of drugs, number of admission, height, length of hospital stay, weight, age, and number of diagnoses. The influencing directions of the risk factors on ADEs were displayed through Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). This study provides a novel method to accurately predict adverse drug events in Chinese pediatric inpatients with the associated risk factors, which may be applicable in clinical practice in the future.

Relationship between adverse drug reactions and unlicensed/off-label drug use in hospitalized children (EREMI): A study protocol

INTRODUCTION

To date, few studies have shown a significant association between off-label drug use and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The main aims of this study is to evaluate the relationship between adverse drug reactions and unlicensed or off-label drugs in hospitalized children and to provide more information on prescribing practice, the amplitude, consequences of unlicensed or off-label drug use in pediatric inpatients.

METHODS

In this multicenter prospective study started from 2013, we use the French summaries of product characteristics in Theriaque (a prescription products guide) as a primary reference source for determining pediatric drug labeling. The detection of ADRs is carried out spontaneously by health professionals and actively by research groups using a trigger tool and patients' electronic health records. The causality between suspected ADRs and medication is evaluated using the Naranjo and the French methods of imputability independently by pharmacovigilance center. All suspected ADRs are submitted for a second evaluation by an independent pharmacovigilance experts.

STRENGTH AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY

For our best knowledge, EREMI is the first large multicenter prospective and objective study in France with an active ADRs monitoring and independent ADRs validation. This study identifies the risk factors that could be used to adjust preventive actions in children's care, guides future research in the field and increases the awareness of physicians in off-label drug use and in detecting and declaring ADRs. As data are obtained through extraction of information from hospital database and medical records, there is likely to be some under-reporting of items or missing data. In this study the field specialists detect all adverse events, experts in pharmacovigilance centers assess them and finally only the ADRs assessed by the independent committee are confirmed. Although we recruit a high number of patients, this observational study is subject to different confounders.

Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Measurement Properties of the Portuguese Version of the Global Trigger Tool for Adverse Events

Purpose

To adapt and validate the Global Trigger Tool (IHI-GTT), which identifies and analyzes adverse events (AE) in hospitalized patients and their measurement properties in the Portuguese context.

Methods

A retrospective cross-sectional study was based on a random sample of 90 medical records. The stages of translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the IHI-GTT were based on the Cross-Cultural Adaptation Protocol that originated from the Portuguese version, GTT-PT, for the hospital context in medical-surgical departments. Internal consistency, reliability, reproducibility, diagnostic tests, and discriminatory predictive value were investigated.

Results

The final phase of the GTT-PT showed insignificant inconsistencies. The pre-test phase confirmed translation accuracy, easy administration, effectiveness in identifying AEs, and relevance of integrating it into hospital risk management. It had a sensitivity of 97.8% and specificity of 74.8%, with a cutoff point of 0.5, an accuracy of 83%, and a positive predictive value of 69.8% and a negative predictive value of 0.98%.

Conclusion

The GTT-PT is a reliable, accurate, and valid tool to identify AE, with robust measurement properties.

Characterising the types of paediatric adverse events detected by the global trigger tool – CareTrack Kids

Introduction

A common method of learning about adverse events (AEs) is by reviewing medical records using the global trigger tool (GTT). However, these studies generally report rates of harm. The aim of this study is to characterise paediatric AEs detected by the GTT using descriptive and qualitative approaches.

Methods

Medical records of children aged 0–15 were reviewed for presence of harm using the GTT. Records from 2012–2013 were sampled from hospital inpatients, emergency departments, general practice and specialist paediatric practices in three Australian states. Nurses undertook a review of each record and if an AE was suspected a doctor performed a verification review of a summary created by the nurse. A qualitative content analysis was undertaken on the summary of verified AEs.

Results

A total of 232 AEs were detected from 6,689 records reviewed. Over four-fifths of the AEs (193/232, 83%) resulted in minor harm to the patient. Nearly half (112/232, 48%) related to medication/intravenous (IV) fluids. Of these, 83% (93/112) were adverse drug reactions. Problems with medical devices/equipment were the next most frequent with nearly two-thirds (32/51, 63%) of these related to intravenous devices. Problems associated with clinical processes/procedures comprise one in six AEs (38/232, 16%), of which diagnostic problems (12/38, 32%) and procedural complications (11/38, 29%) were the most frequent.

Conclusion

Adverse drug reactions and issues with IVs are frequently identified AEs reflecting their common use in paediatrics. The qualitative approach taken in this study allowed AE types to be characterised, which is a prerequisite for developing and prioritising improvements in practice.

Establishment of a pediatric trigger tool based on Global Trigger Tool to identify adverse drug events of children: experience in a Chinese hospital

Background

The Global Trigger Tool (GTT),which is a method using “triggers” to review medical record retrospectively to identify possible adverse events. Several studies showed that the GTT was effective. However, there were only a few localized trigger tools that had been established to detect pediatric adverse drug events (ADEs) in China. This study aimed to establish a pediatric trigger tool based on GTT, to examine the performance by detecting pediatric inpatients ADEs in a Chinese hospital (a retrospective review), and to investigate the factors associating with the occurrence of ADEs.

Methods

The triggers were established by three steps including literature search, triggers extraction and revision, and experts investigation. A retrospective cohort study was conducted to detect ADEs by using 200 pediatric inpatient records of Sichuan Provincial People’s Hospital.

Results

Thirty-three preliminary triggers were established, and 2 rounds of experts investigation were conducted. Finally, 33 triggers were established. In the retrospective review, the positive trigger rate was 64.0%, while the positive predictive value (PPV) was 24.9%. The occurrence of inpatients with ADEs was 20.5%. ADEs/100 admissions were 49.0. ADEs/1000 patient days were 46.89. The most common ADE categories were leukocyte disorders, skin disorders and platelet disorders. The severity of 39 ADEs was grade 1, 55 ADEs was grade 2, 4 ADEs was grade 3. The highest frequency of ADE-related drugs was antineoplastic, followed by antibacterial. The length of stay and the leukemia in the diagnosed diseases were positively correlated with ADEs.

Conclusions

The 33 pediatric triggers may detect ADEs effectively, but still need to be optimized. This study may provide some references for further research in order to improve the rationality and safety of medication.

Validating the Chinese geriatric trigger tool and analyzing adverse drug event associated risk factors in elderly Chinese patients: A retrospective review

Objective

The aim was to evaluate the performance of the initial Chinese geriatric trigger tool to detect adverse drug events (ADEs) in Chinese older patients, to attempt to shorten this list for improving the efficiency of the trigger tool, and to study the incidence and characteristics of ADEs in this population.

Methods

A sample of 25 cases was randomly selected per half a month from eligible patients who aged 60 years and older, hospitalized more than 24 hours, and discharged or died between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2017 in West China hospital. A two-stage retrospective chart review of the included inpatients were conducted. ADEs were detected using a list of 42 triggers previously selected by an expert panel by means of a Delphi method. The number of triggers identified and ADEs detected were recorded and the positive predictive value (PPV) of each trigger was calculated to select the most efficient triggers. Several variables were recorded, including age, sex, number of diseases, length of hospital stay and so on, to analyze the risk factor of ADEs.

Results

Among 1800 patients, 1646 positive triggers and 296 ADEs were detected in 234 (13.00%) patients. Older patients who were younger, had more medications, longer stays or more admission, and did not experience surgical operation more likely experienced ADEs. Triggers with PPV less than 5% were eliminated, which resulted in the upgraded version of Chinese geriatric trigger tool of 20 triggers with a PPV of 28.50%. This upgraded tool accounted for 99.66% of all ADEs detected.

Conclusions

The upgraded version of Chinese geriatric trigger tool was an efficient tool for identifying ADEs in Chinese older patients. Future, the trigger tool could be incorporated into routine screen systems to provide real-time identification of ADEs, thereby enabling timely clinical interventions.

Association between cancer-specific adverse event triggers and mortality: A validation study

Background

As there are few validated measures of patient safety in clinical oncology, creating an efficient measurement instrument would create significant value. Accordingly, we sought to assess the validity of a novel patient safety measure by examining the association of oncology‐specific triggers and mortality using administrative claims data.

Methods

We examined a retrospective cohort of 322 887 adult cancer patients enrolled in commercial or Medicare Advantage products for one year after an initial diagnosis of breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer in 2008‐2014. We used diagnosis and procedure codes to calculate the prevalence of 16 cancer‐specific "triggers"–events that signify a potential adverse event. We compared one‐year mortality rates among patients with and without triggers by cancer type and metastatic status using logistic regression models.

Results

Trigger events affected 19% of patients and were most common among patients with metastatic colorectal (41%) and lung (50%) cancers. There was increased one‐year mortality among patients with triggers compared to patients without triggers across all cancer types in unadjusted and multivariate analyses. The increased mortality rate among patients with trigger events was particularly striking for nonmetastatic prostate cancer (1.3% vs 7.5%, adjusted odds ratio 1.96 [95% CI 1.49‐2.57]) and nonmetastatic colorectal cancer (4.1% vs 11.7%, 1.44 [1.19‐1.75]).

Conclusions

The association between adverse event triggers and poor survival among a cohort of cancer patients supports the validity of a cancer‐specific, administrative claims‐based trigger tool.

Adverse events in psychiatry: a national cohort study in Sweden with a unique psychiatric trigger tool

BACKGROUND

The vast majority of patient safety research has focused on somatic health care. Although specific adverse events (AEs) within psychiatric healthcare have been explored, the overall level and nature of AEs is sparsely investigated.

METHODS

Cohort study using a retrospective record review based on a two-step trigger tool methodology in the charts of randomly selected patients 18 years or older admitted to the psychiatric acute care departments in all Swedish regions from January 1 to June 30, 2017. Hospital care together with corresponding outpatient care were reviewed as a continuum, over a maximum of 3 months. The AEs were categorised according to type, severity and preventability.

RESULTS

In total, the medical records of 2552 patients were reviewed. Among the patients, 50.4% were women and 49.6% were men. The median (range) age was 44 (18-97) years for women and 44.5 (18-93) years for men. In 438 of the reviewed records, 720 AEs were identified, corresponding to the AEs identified in 17.2% [95% confidence interval, 15.7-18.6] of the records. The majority of AEs resulted in less or moderate harm, and 46.2% were considered preventable. Prolonged disease progression and deliberate self-harm were the most common types of AEs. AEs were significantly more common in women (21.5%) than in men (12.7%) but showed no difference between age groups. Severe or catastrophic harm was found in 2.3% of the records, and the majority affected were women (61%). Triggers pointing at deficient quality of care were found in 78% of the records, with the absence of a treatment plan being the most common.

CONCLUSIONS

AEs are common in psychiatric care. Aside from further patient safety work, systematic interventions are also warranted to improve the quality of psychiatric care.

Drug Use and Type of Adverse Drug Events-Identified by a Trigger Tool in Different Units in a Swedish Pediatric Hospital

PURPOSE

The objectives of our study were to determine drug use, type and incidence of all adverse event associated with drug or drug-related processes (Adverse Drug Events, ADE) among pediatric inpatients in relation to hospital unit and length of stay.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

600 pediatric (0-18 years) admissions at a Swedish university hospital during one year were included and stratified in blocks to 150 neonatal, surgical/orthopedic, medicine and emergency-medicine unit admissions, respectively. Adverse events were identified from medical records using a pediatric trigger tool. All triggers identifying an adverse event related to drugs and drug-related devices were included. Data on drug use were extracted from the hospital drug-data warehouse.

RESULTS

In total, 17794 daily drug orders were administrated to 486 (81.0% exposed) admissions. Parental nutrition, potassium salts and morphine constituted half of all high-risk drugs prescribed. Two-thirds of intravenous irritating drug doses consisted of vancomycin, esomeprazole and meropenem. In 129 (21.5%) admissions, at least one ADE was identified, out of which 21 ADE were classified as more severe (National Coordinating Council Medication Error Reporting Prevention-Index, NCCMERP≥F). The ADE incidence was 47.4 (95% confidence interval: 39.4-57.3) per 1000 admission days and varied by unit category. In neonatal units, 56.9 (49.5-65.4) ADEs/1000 admission days were detected, in surgery/orthopedic 54.2 (40.3-72.8), in medicine 44.1 (33.1-58.7), and in emergency-medicine 14.3 (7.7-26.7) ADEs/1000 admission days were found. The most common types of ADEs were identified by triggers that were not directly aiming at drugs including insufficiently treated pain (incidence peaking already in the first days), skin, tissue or vascular harm (peaking at the end of the first week) and hospital-acquired infections (peaking in later admission days).

CONCLUSION

Adverse drug events are common in pediatric patients. The incidence of ADEs and type of ADE varies by hospital unit and length of hospital stay.

Developing a cancer-specific trigger tool to identify treatment-related adverse events using administrative data

Background

As there are few validated tools to identify treatment‐related adverse events across cancer care settings, we sought to develop oncology‐specific “triggers” to flag potential adverse events among cancer patients using claims data.

Methods

322 887 adult patients undergoing an initial course of cancer‐directed therapy for breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer from 2008 to 2014 were drawn from a large commercial claims database. We defined 16 oncology‐specific triggers using diagnosis and procedure codes. To distinguish treatment‐related complications from comorbidities, we required a logical and temporal relationship between a treatment and the associated trigger. We tabulated the prevalence of triggers by cancer type and metastatic status during 1‐year of follow‐up, and examined cancer trigger risk factors.

Results

Cancer‐specific trigger events affected 19% of patients over the initial treatment year. The trigger burden varied by disease and metastatic status, from 6% of patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer to 41% and 50% of those with metastatic colorectal and lung cancers, respectively. The most prevalent triggers were abnormal serum bicarbonate, blood transfusion, non‐contrast chest CT scan following radiation therapy, and hypoxemia. Among patients with metastatic disease, 10% had one trigger event and 29% had two or more. Triggers were more common among older patients, women, non‐whites, patients with low family incomes, and those without a college education.

Conclusions

Oncology‐specific triggers offer a promising method for identifying potential patient safety events among patients across cancer care settings.

IMPLEMENTATION AND PERFORMANCE OF TRACKERS FOR THE DETECTION OF SURGICAL ADVERSE EVENTS

ABSTRACT Objective: to identify the frequency and performance of the Canadian Adverse Events Study tracking criteria for the confirmation of surgical adverse events in adult patients. Method: a descriptive and retrospective study conducted in a public hospital in the state of Paraná from May to November 2017. A retrospective review of 192 medical records was conducted using 16 tracking criteria; and the confirmation of adverse events was in charge of a committee of experts composed of a physician and nurses. Data was analyzed by means of descriptive statistics. Results: the mean performance of the trackers was 73.3%. A total of 70 trackers were confirmed in 21.8% of the medical records with adverse events. The mean number of trackers was 0.4 per medical record (varying from zero to three). Adverse reaction to the medication; unplanned return to the operating room; unplanned removal, injury or correction of an organ or structure during surgery or invasive procedure; cardiopulmonary arrest reversed and hospital infection/sepsis were classified as high performance trackers (100.0%). Eight trackers did not contribute to the identification of adverse events. Conclusion: high-performance trackers can assist in detecting adverse events; there is potential to improve the tracking tool, contributing to its performance as a research method in Brazilian hospitals.

Application of electronic trigger tools to identify targets for improving diagnostic safety

Progress in reducing diagnostic errors remains slow partly due to poorly defined methods to identify errors, high-risk situations, and adverse events. Electronic trigger (e-trigger) tools, which mine vast amounts of patient data to identify signals indicative of a likely error or adverse event, offer a promising method to efficiently identify errors. The increasing amounts of longitudinal electronic data and maturing data warehousing techniques and infrastructure offer an unprecedented opportunity to implement new types of e-trigger tools that use algorithms to identify risks and events related to the diagnostic process. We present a knowledge discovery framework, the Safer Dx Trigger Tools Framework, that enables health systems to develop and implement e-trigger tools to identify and measure diagnostic errors using comprehensive electronic health record (EHR) data. Safer Dx e-trigger tools detect potential diagnostic events, allowing health systems to monitor event rates, study contributory factors and identify targets for improving diagnostic safety. In addition to promoting organisational learning, some e-triggers can monitor data prospectively and help identify patients at high-risk for a future adverse event, enabling clinicians, patients or safety personnel to take preventive actions proactively. Successful application of electronic algorithms requires health systems to invest in clinical informaticists, information technology professionals, patient safety professionals and clinicians, all of who work closely together to overcome development and implementation challenges. We outline key future research, including advances in natural language processing and machine learning, needed to improve effectiveness of e-triggers. Integrating diagnostic safety e-triggers in institutional patient safety strategies can accelerate progress in reducing preventable harm from diagnostic errors.

The Harvard medical practice study trigger system performance in deceased patients

Background

To detect possible threats to quality and safety, multiple systems have been developed. One of them is retrospective chart review. A team of experts scrutinizes medical records, selected by trigger systems, to detect possible adverse events (AEs). The most important AEs and more hints for possible improvement of care appear in deceased patients. Using triggers in a sample of these patients might increase the performance and lower the burden of scrutinizing records without possible preventable AEs. The aim of this study was therefore to determine the performance of the trigger system in a sample of deceased patients and to calculate the specificity and the sensitivity of this trigger system for predicting AEs.

Methods

We performed a study in which the records of deceased patients were screened for triggers by a team of trained nurses. A sample of 100 medical records was randomly selected out of records which had been screened between 2012 and 2015 for the first time, prior to the study in 2016. For the determination of significant differences between the first and second screening, McNemar’s test of symmetry was used. Also, observed agreement, Cohen’s Kappa and prevalence-adjusted and-bias-adjusted-kappa (PABAK) statistics were calculated. This was done for the two trigger rounds on both any trigger present and for every trigger separately.

Results

The observed agreement for any given trigger was 75% with a Kappa and PABAK of 0.5. For the individual triggers, the observed agreement was on average 90%. The corresponding Kappa was on average 0.42 (range: − 0.03-0.78) and the average PABAK was 0.8 (range: 0.44–0.92). Two adverse events were found in cases without triggers previously. The recalculated specificity and sensitivity for the original population were 58 and 92% respectively.

Conclusions

For the reproducibility of triggers it seems that some perform better than others, but on average this is to our opinion suboptimal. The low specificity implies that many records are selected without AEs. This leads to a high false-positive rate making this labour-intensive record review process costly. Therefore, research for better and more expedient systems is required.

The Brazilian Portuguese version of the Pediatric Trigger Toolkit is applicable to measure the occurrence of adverse drug events in Brazilian pediatric inpatients

OBJECTIVE

To describe the process of translation, adaptation, and validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Pediatric Trigger Toolkit: Measuring Adverse Drug Events in the Children's Hospital.

METHODS

The validation process for the research instrument was carried out in five steps: (I) translation from English into Brazilian Portuguese by two independent translators; (II) synthesis of the translated versions; (III) adaptation of the triggers to the Brazilian context using a modified Delphi method carried out in two rounds; (IV) application of the research instrument in the review of 240 hospitalizations during 2014; and (V) back-translation from Brazilian Portuguese to English.

RESULTS

The translation step resulted in two versions, which were then synthesized to obtain equivalence within the Brazilian cultural context. The process of adapting the research instrument allowed the inclusion and adaptation of some triggers, as well as the exclusion of others, based on the consensus reached among experts during the Delphi step. The positive predictive value of the research instrument was 13.51%, and the antihistamine trigger presented the highest positive predictive value.

CONCLUSION

The research instrument can be used to track the occurrence of adverse drug events in pediatric patients in Brazilian hospitals. Despite the adjustments made, triggers that were not identified or that had low positive predictive value can suggest the need for additional changes. However, more studies are needed before modifying or removing a trigger.

Rastreadores para a busca ativa de eventos adversos a medicamentos em recém-nascidos

O objetivo foi verificar a aplicação e o desempenho dos rastreadores para a busca ativa de eventos adversos a medicamentos em recém-nascidos hospitalizados. Trata-se de um estudo de coorte prospectivo. A pesquisa foi realizada em um hospital universitário, nas unidades de cuidado neonatal, durante o período de março a setembro de 2015. Uma lista de rastreadores foi desenvolvida para ser utilizada na identificação de eventos adversos a medicamentos nessa população. A lista contemplou rastreadores antídotos, clínicos e laboratoriais. Foram incluídos 125 recém-nascidos que utilizaram medicamentos durante a internação. Os prontuários dos recém-nascidos eram avaliados, a fim de detectar a existência de um rastreador. Se o rastreador fosse encontrado, seguia-se com uma revisão à procura de possíveis eventos adversos a medicamentos ocorridos. O rendimento de cada um dos rastreadores para identificar eventos adversos a medicamentos foi calculado e depois categorizado de acordo com o desempenho. Novecentos e vinte e cinco rastreadores identificaram 208 suspeitas de eventos adversos a medicamentos. A taxa de rendimento geral dos rastreadores foi de 22,5%. Os rastreadores mais identificados nos prontuários foram: queda da saturação de oxigênio, aumento da frequência de evacuação, suspensão de medicamento e vômito. Os rastreadores de alto desempenho na identificação de eventos adversos a medicamentos foram: aumento da creatinina, aumento da ureia, enterocolite necrosante, prescrição de flumazenil, hipercalcemia, hipercalemia, hipernatremia, hipersedação. Os rastreadores elencados com base neste estudo podem ser utilizados para a busca de eventos adversos a medicamentos em instituições de saúde de perfil semelhante, devendo ser considerados aqueles que obtiveram melhor desempenho e menor carga de trabalho para serem identificados.

Feasibility of Electronic Health Record-Based Triggers in Detecting Dental Adverse Events

BACKGROUND

We can now quantify and characterize the harm patients suffer in the dental chair by mining data from electronic health records (EHRs). Most dental institutions currently deploy a random audit of charts using locally developed definitions to identify such patient safety incidents. Instead, selection of patient charts using triggers and assessment through calibrated reviewers may more efficiently identify dental adverse events (AEs).

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to develop and test EHR-based triggers at four academic institutions and find dental AEs, defined as moderate or severe physical harm due to dental treatment.

METHODS

We used an iterative and consensus-based process to develop 11 EHR-based triggers to identify dental AEs. Two dental experts at each institution independently reviewed a sample of triggered charts using a common AE definition and classification system. An expert panel provided a second level of review to confirm AEs identified by sites reviewers. We calculated the performance of each trigger and identified strategies for improvement.

RESULTS

A total of 100 AEs were identified by 10 of the 11 triggers. In 57% of the cases, pain was the most common AE identified, followed by infection and hard tissue damage. Positive predictive value (PPV) for the triggers ranged from 0 to 0.29. The best performing triggers were those developed to identify infections (PPV = 0.29), allergies (PPV = 0.23), failed implants (PPV = 0.21), and nerve injuries (PPV = 0.19). Most AEs (90%) were categorized as temporary moderate-to-severe harm (E2) and the remainder as permanent moderate-to-severe harm (G2).

CONCLUSION

EHR-based triggers are a promising approach to unearth AEs among dental patients compared with a manual audit of random charts. Data in dental EHRs appear to be sufficiently structured to allow the use of triggers. Pain was the most common AE type followed by infection and hard tissue damage.

Emergency department risk factors for serious clinical deterioration in a paediatric hospital in Peru

AIM

Identification of critically ill children upon presentation to the emergency department (ED) is challenging, especially when resources are limited. The objective of this study was to identify ED risk factors associated with serious clinical deterioration (SCD) during hospitalisation in a resource-limited setting.

METHODS

A retrospective case-control study of children less than 18 years of age presenting to the ED in a large, freestanding children's hospital in Peru was performed. Cases had SCD during the first 7 days of hospitalisation whereas controls did not. Information collected during initial ED evaluation was used to identify risk factors for SCD.

RESULTS

A total of 120 cases and 974 controls were included. In univariate analysis, young age, residence outside Lima, evaluation at another facility prior to ED presentation, congenital malformations, abnormal neurologic baseline, co-morbidities and a prior paediatric intensive care unit admission were associated with SCD. In multivariate analysis, age < 12 months, residence outside Lima and evaluation at another facility prior to ED presentation remained associated with SCD. In addition, comatose neurological status, hypoxaemia, tachycardia, tachypnoea and temperature were also associated with SCD.

CONCLUSIONS

Many risk factors for SCD during hospitalisation can be identified upon presentation to the ED. Using these factors to adjust monitoring during and after the ED stay has the potential to decrease SCD events. Further studies are needed to determine whether this holds true in other resource-limited settings.

Implementing paediatric early warning scores systems in the Netherlands: future implications

Background

Paediatric Early Warning Scores (PEWS) are increasingly being used for early identification and management of clinical deterioration in paediatric patients. A PEWS system includes scores, cut-off points and appropriate early intervention. In 2011, The Dutch Ministry of Health advised hospitals to implement a PEWS system in order to improve patient safety in paediatric wards. The objective of this study was to examine the results of implementation of PEWS systems and to gain insight into the attitudes of professionals towards using a PEWS system in Dutch non-university hospitals.

Methods

Quantitative data were gathered at start, midway and at the end of the implementation period through retrospective patient record review (n = 554). Semi-structured interviews with professionals (n = 8) were used to gain insight in the implementation process and experiences. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using an inductive approach.

Results

Looking at PEWS systems of the five participating hospitals, different parameters and policies were found. While all hospitals included heart rate and respiratory rate, other variables differed among hospitals. At baseline, none of the hospitals used a PEWS system. After 1 year, PEWS were recorded in 69.2% of the patient records and elevated PEWS resulted in appropriate action in 49.1%. Three themes emerged from the interviews: 1) while the importance of using a PEWS system was acknowledged, professionals voiced some doubts about the effectiveness and validity of their PEWS system 2) registering PEWS required little extra effort and was facilitated by PEWS being integrated into the electronic patient record 3) Without a national PEWS system or guidelines, hospitals found it difficult to identify a suitable PEWS system for their setting. Existing systems were not always considered applicable in a non-university setting.

Conclusions

After 1 year, hospitals showed improvements in the use of their PEWS system, although some were decidedly more successful than others. Doubts among staff about validity, effectiveness and communication with other hospitals during transfer to higher level care hospital might hinder sustainable implementation. For these purposes the development of a national PEWS system is recommended, consisting of a “core set” of PEWS, cut-off points and associated early intervention.

Development of a 'ready-to-use' tool that includes preventability, for the assessment of adverse drug events in oncology

Background Adverse drug events (ADEs) occur frequently in oncology and justify continuous assessment and monitoring. There are several methods for detecting them, but the trigger tool method seems the most appropriate. Although a generic tool exists, its use for ADEs in oncology has not been convincing. The development of a focused version is therefore necessary. Objective To provide an oncology-focused trigger tool that evaluates the prevalence, harm, and preventability in a standardised method for pragmatic use in ADE surveillance. Setting Hospitals with cancer care in France. Method The tool has been constructed in two steps: (1) constitution of an oncology-centred list of ADEs; 30 pharmacists/practitioners in cancer care from nine hospitals selected a list of ADEs using a method of agreement adapted from the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method; and (2) construction of three standardised dimensions for the characterisation of each ADE (including causality, severity, and preventability). Main outcome measure The main outcome measure was validation of the tool, including preventability criteria. Results The tool is composed of a final list of 15 ADEs. For each ADE, a 'reviewer form' has been designed and validated by the panel. It comprises (1) the trigger(s), (2) flowcharts to guide the reviewer, (3) criteria for grading harm, and (4) a standardised assessment of preventability with 6-14 closed sentences for each ADE in terms of therapeutic management and/or prevention of side-effects. Conclusion A complete 'ready-to-use' tool for ADE monitoring in oncology has been developed that allows the assessment of three standardised dimensions.

Adverse drug events in Chinese pediatric inpatients and associated risk factors: a retrospective review using the Global Trigger Tool

Understanding the epidemiology and risk factors of adverse drug events (ADEs) in pediatric inpatient is essential if we are to prevent, reduce or ameliorate the harm experienced. The Global Trigger Tool (GTT) is a method of retrospective medical record review that measures harm in hospitalized children. We employed a three-stage retrospective chart review of random samples of 1800 pediatric inpatients discharged from January 2013 to December 2015. 31 kinds of pediatric-specific triggers were made based on the previous trigger tool studies developed for use in adult or pediatric. Positive predictive value (PPV) of individual triggers, as well as ADEs detection rates were calculated. Stepwise logistic regression was performed to investigate risk factors associated with ADEs. Of 1746 patients, detected in 221 patients (12.7%) with 247 ADEs. The PPV of the trigger tool was 13.3%. Of the 247 ADEs, 82.6% were identified as category E, 11.7% category F and 5.7% category H. The pediatric-focused trigger tool is a feasible and useful tool for detecting pediatric ADEs. Especially for patients who have had more drugs, more doses or more admissions which needs to be closely monitored as triggers to improve the safety.

Adverse events in patients in home healthcare: a retrospective record review using trigger tool methodology

OBJECTIVE

Home healthcare is an increasingly common part of healthcare. The patients are often aged, frail and have multiple diseases, and multiple caregivers are involved in their treatment. This study explores the origin, incidence, types and preventability of adverse events (AEs) that occur in patients receiving home healthcare.

DESIGN

A study using retrospective record review and trigger tool methodology.

SETTING AND METHODS

Ten teams with experience of home healthcare from nine regions across Sweden reviewed home healthcare records in a two-stage procedure using 38 predefined triggers in four modules. A random sample of records from 600 patients (aged 18 years or older) receiving home healthcare during 2015 were reviewed.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The cumulative incidence of AEs found in patients receiving home healthcare; secondary measures were origin, types, severity of harm and preventability of the AEs.

RESULTS

The patients were aged 20-79 years, 280 men and 320 women. The review teams identified 356 AEs in 226 (37.7%; 95% CI 33.0 to 42.8) of the home healthcare records. Of these, 255 (71.6%; 95% CI 63.2 to 80.8) were assessed as being preventable, and most (246, 69.1%; 95% CI 60.9 to 78.2) required extra healthcare visits or led to a prolonged period of healthcare. Most of the AEs (271, 76.1%; 95% CI 67.5 to 85.6) originated in home healthcare; the rest were detected during home healthcare but were related to care outside home healthcare. The most common AEs were healthcare-associated infections, falls and pressure ulcers.

CONCLUSIONS

AEs in patients receiving home healthcare are common, mostly preventable and often cause temporary harm requiring extra healthcare resources. The most frequent types of AEs must be addressed and reduced through improvements in interprofessional collaboration. This is an important area for future studies.

Diagnostic Errors: Impact of an Educational Intervention on Pediatric Primary Care

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of our study was to determine the impact of an educational program on a provider's knowledge related to diagnostic errors and diagnostic reasoning strategies.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental interventional study with a multimedia approach, case study discussion, and trigger-generated medical record review at two time points was conducted. Measurement tools included a test developed by the National Patient Safety Foundation, Reducing Diagnostic Errors: Strategies for Solutions Quiz, additional diagnostic reasoning questions, and a trigger-generated process to analyze medical records.

RESULTS

Knowledge related to diagnostic errors statistically improved from the pretest to posttest scores with sustained 60-day differences (p < .025). Although there was a decline in the proportion of patients returning with the same chief complaint within 14 days, this was not statistically significant (p < .15). When providers were confronted with an unrecognizable clinical presentation, they reported an increased use of a "diagnostic timeout" (p < .038).

DISCUSSION

Providers developed an increased awareness of the presence of diagnostic errors in the primary care setting, the contributing risk factors for a diagnostic error, and possible strategies to reduce diagnostic errors. These factors had an unexpected impact on changing the primary care practice model to enhance the continuity of patient care.

The application of the Global Trigger Tool: a systematic review

Purpose

This study describes the use of, and modifications and additions made to, the Global Trigger Tool (GTT) since its first release in 2003, and summarizes its findings with respect to counting and characterizing adverse events (AEs).

Data sources

Peer-reviewed literature up to 31st December 2014.

Study selection

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.

Data extraction

Two authors extracted and compiled the demographics, methodologies and results of the selected studies.

Results of data synthesis

Of the 48 studies meeting the eligibility criteria, 44 collected data from inpatient medical records and four from general practice records. Studies were undertaken in 16 countries. Over half did not follow the standard GTT protocol regarding the number of reviewers used. 'Acts of omission' were included in one quarter of studies. Incident reporting detected between 2% and 8% of AEs that were detected with the GTT. Rates of AEs varied in general inpatient studies between 7% and 40%. Infections, problems with surgical procedures and medication were the most common incident types.

Conclusion

The GTT is a flexible tool used in a range of settings with varied applications. Substantial differences in AE rates were evident across studies, most likely associated with methodological differences and disparate reviewer interpretations. AE rates should not be compared between institutions or studies. Recommendations include adding 'omission' AEs, using preventability scores for priority setting, and re-framing the GTT's purpose to understand and characterize AEs rather than just counting them.

Development of a trigger tool to identify adverse events and no-harm incidents that affect patients admitted to home healthcare

BACKGROUND

Adverse events (AEs) and no-harm incidents are common and of great concern in healthcare. A common method for identification of AEs is retrospective record review (RRR) using predefined triggers. This method has been used frequently in inpatient care, but AEs in home healthcare have not been explored to the same extent. The aim of this study was to develop a trigger tool (TT) for the identification of both AEs and no-harm incidents affecting adult patients admitted to home healthcare in Sweden, and to describe the methodology used for this development.

METHODS

The TT was developed and validated in a stepwise manner, in collaboration with experts with different skills, using (1) literature review and interviews, (2) a five-round modified Delphi process, and (3) two-stage RRRs. Ten trained teams from different sites in Sweden reviewed 600 randomly selected records.

RESULTS

In all, triggers were found 4031 times in 518 (86.3%) records, with a mean of 6.7 (median 4, range 1-54) triggers per record with triggers. The positive predictive values (PPVs) for AEs and no-harm incidents were 25.4% and 16.3%, respectively, resulting in a PPV of 41.7% (range 0.0%-96.1% per trigger) for the total TT when using 38 triggers. The most common triggers were unplanned contact with physician and/or registered nurse, moderate/severe pain, moderate/severe worry, anxiety, suffering, existential pain and/or psychological pain. AEs were identified in 37.7% of the patients and no-harm incidents in 29.5%.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that adapted triggers with definitions and decision support, developed to identify AEs and no-harm incidents that affect patients admitted to home healthcare, may be a valid method for safety and quality improvement work in home healthcare.