In the past several decades, technological advances have opened new possibilities for improving patient safety. Using technology to digitize healthcare processes has the potential to increase standardization and efficiency of clinical workflows and to reduce errors and cost across all healthcare settings.¹ However, if technological approaches are designed or implemented poorly, the burden on clinicians can increase. For example, overburdened clinicians can experience alert fatigue and fail to respond to notifications. This can lead to more medical errors.

This piece focuses on perinatal mental health and efforts to improve maternal safety.   

An adult woman with a history of suicidal ideation was taking prescribed antidepressants, but later required admission to the hospital after overdosing on her prescribed medications. A consulting psychiatrist evaluated the patient but recommended sending her home on a benzodiazepine alone, under observation by her mother.

A 48-year-old obese man with a history of obstructive sleep apnea was placed under general anesthesia for corneal surgery. On completion of the operation, the patient was transferred to a motorized gurney to extubate him in a sitting position because the operating room (OR) table was too narrow. However, while the team was moving him from the OR table to the gurney, a nurse inadvertently pulled on the anesthetic machine hoses. The endotracheal tube became dislodged and the patient could not be ventilated.

This case describes a 13-year-old girl who presented to several health care providers with typical symptoms, physical signs, and early laboratory findings suggestive of adrenal insufficiency (AI) yet the diagnosis was delayed for several months due to diagnostic biases. After she suffered a sudden cardiac arrest during a visit to her local emergency department and was airlifted to a tertiary care facility, she was found to be in adrenal crisis secondary to Addison’s disease.

This patient with recently diagnosed adenocarcinoma of the esophagus underwent esophagoscopy with endoscopic ultrasound, which was complicated by thoracic esophageal perforation. The perforation was endoscopically closed during the procedure. However, there was a lack of clear communication regarding the operator’s confidence in the success of endoscopic closure and their recommendations for the modality and timing of follow-up imaging, which ultimately led to significant delays in patient care.