Narrow Results Clear All
- Communication Improvement 1
- Education and Training 2
- Legal and Policy Approaches
- Quality Improvement Strategies
- Technologic Approaches 1
Search results for "Information Professionals"
Journal Article > Review
Interventions to improve safe and effective medicines use by consumers: an overview of systematic reviews.
Ryan R, Santesso N, Lowe D, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;4:CD007768.
This review describes how researchers identified and analyzed systematic reviews on interventions to augment safe medication use. The authors provide an overview of safety improvement strategies, such as reminders and financial incentives. Medication self-management programs generally enhanced medication safety and health outcomes, but more research is needed for clinically complex populations and technology-enabled strategies.
Journal Article > Commentary
Making inpatient medication reconciliation patient centered, clinically relevant and implementable: a consensus statement on key principles and necessary first steps.
Greenwald JL, Halasyamani L, Greene J, et al. J Hosp Med. 2010;5:477-485.
A National Patient Safety Goal (NPSG) since 2005, medication reconciliation involves verifying medications and dosages as well as documenting and explaining medication changes. Medication reconciliation has been notoriously difficult to accomplish in both inpatient and outpatient settings. The Joint Commission currently does not evaluate medication reconciliation in accreditation surveys. This consensus statement, endorsed by The Joint Commission and other major professional societies, calls for recasting medication reconciliation in a patient-centered, patient safety–oriented fashion. Several key steps to develop effective and usable reconciliation tools include multidisciplinary involvement with clear roles among clinicians, patient-centered measurement strategies, and rigorous study and dissemination of implementation strategies. The findings of this consensus group will be used in the revised medication reconciliation NPSG, which will be issued in 2011.
Journal Article > Study
Publicly available hospital comparison web sites: determination of useful, valid, and appropriate information for comparing surgical quality.
Leonardi MJ, McGory ML, Ko CY. Arch Surg. 2007;142:863-869.
The growing focus on health care quality has led to the development of several Web sites that make hospital quality information publicly available to consumers. This study evaluated six such Web sites (the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services' Hospital Compare, the Joint Commission's Quality Check, the Leapfrog Group, and three commercial sites) for ease of use, data accuracy, and consistency of hospital rankings for several surgical quality measures. In general, the governmental and non-profit Web sites were rated as easier to use and had more complete information. However, the authors found significant variation in the risk adjustment methods used and the types of outcomes reported on each Web site, leading to poor reproducibility of rankings for specific surgical procedures.