Narrow Results Clear All
- Communication Improvement 3
- Culture of Safety 4
- Education and Training 5
- Error Reporting and Analysis 19
- Human Factors Engineering 4
- Legal and Policy Approaches
Quality Improvement Strategies
- Benchmarking 12
- Specialization of Care 2
- Technologic Approaches 3
- Transparency and Accountability 6
- Device-related Complications 1
- Diagnostic Errors 1
- Discontinuities, Gaps, and Hand-Off Problems 1
- Identification Errors 2
- Medical Complications 6
- Medication Errors/Preventable Adverse Drug Events 5
- Nonsurgical Procedural Complications 1
- Psychological and Social Complications 1
- Surgical Complications 10
- Nursing 1
- Pharmacy 2
- Family Members and Caregivers 4
- Health Care Executives and Administrators 23
- Health Care Providers 16
- Non-Health Care Professionals 6
- Patients 17
Search results for "Medicine"
- Public Reporting
Gabler E. New York Times. May 31, 2019.
Pediatric cardiac surgery is highly technical and risky. This newspaper article reports on a poorly performing pediatric cardiac surgery program, concerns raised by staff, and insufficient response from organizational leadership. Lack of data transparency, insufficient resources, and limited program capabilities to support a complex program contributed to poor outcomes for pediatric patients.
Lives Lost, Lives Saved: An Updated Comparative Analysis of Avoidable Deaths at Hospitals Graded by The Leapfrog Group.
Austin M, Derk J. Baltimore, MD: Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, and Johns Hopkins Medicine; May 2019.
Measures help track gaps in process and evidence of safety improvements. This white paper examines the performance of hospitals receiving Hospital Safety Grades and the relationship between high-level recognition and preventable harm. The report estimates that a substantial number of lives could have been saved if performance metrics had been met, but concludes that even high-performing hospitals exhibit areas in need of improvement.
Journal Article > Study
Do crowdsourced hospital ratings coincide with Hospital Compare measures of clinical and nonclinical quality?
Perez V, Freedman S. Health Serv Res. 2018;53:4491-4506.
This study examined the correlation between crowdsourced ratings of hospitals (i.e., through consumer-oriented sites) and publicly reported quality metrics (the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Compare website). Investigators found good correlation between crowdsourced hospital ratings and Hospital Compare patient experience scores, but lower correlation between crowdsourced ratings and measures of hospital quality and safety.
Journal Article > Commentary
Reilly BM. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1741-1743.
Journal Article > Study
Associations between hospital characteristics, measure reporting, and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services overall hospital quality star ratings.
DeLancey JO, Softcheck J, Chung JW, Barnard C, Dahlke AR, Bilimoria KY. JAMA. 2017;317:2015-2017.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) recently implemented the star rating system for hospitals as an overall measure of quality and safety. Although studies have found a correlation between the star ratings and clinical outcomes, this study found that high star ratings were more likely to be given to specialty or critical access hospitals. These hospitals are exempt from some of the CMS quality measure reporting requirements, and thus they did not report the same data as lower-rated hospitals. Other studies have also called into question the methodology behind the star rating system.
Ornstein C. Health Shots. National Public Radio and ProPublica. April 18, 2017.
Summary data about serious errors in hospitals are available, but often details of accreditation investigation findings are not accessible to the public. This news article reports on efforts by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to make this information publicly available to augment transparency and enhance health care safety.
Rau J. National Public Radio. July 27, 2016.
Although quality rating systems have yet to receive approval across the health care industry, they still serve as a way for consumers to select hospitals and providers. The developers of rating services continue to refine metrics to hone their effectiveness. This news article reports on the latest set of ratings from the Hospital Compare program and concerns associated with the results.
Journal Article > Commentary
Moffatt-Bruce SD, Ferdinand FD, Fann JI. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;102:358-362.
Although error disclosure is increasingly encouraged in health care, challenges to achieving transparency include liability and risk considerations, particularly for surgeons. This commentary describes the experiences of two health care systems that have implemented approaches to support transparent disclosure of medical errors.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Health Care Innovations Exchange. May 18, 2016.
Rau J. Washington Post. May 17, 2016.
Collecting data to meet quality measurement requirements adds to resource burden for many health care organizations, and there is controversy around the benefits of such rating systems for both patients and clinicians. This news article discusses problems with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services rating mechanism, Hospital Compare.
Stock S, Putnam J, Carroll J, Pham S. NBC Bay Area. November 19, 2014.
Hospital reporting of errors in the United States has been suboptimal. This news video investigates the effectiveness of a state reporting initiative in California. Although hospitals have reported 6282 adverse events to the state in 4 years, patient safety experts suggest that those results do not reliably represent all the incidents that should have been submitted.
Eisler P, Hansen B. USA Today. August 20, 2013.
This newspaper article reports on physicians with records of misconduct and how poor oversight for monitoring and discipline allows them to continue practicing medicine.
Oakbrook Terrace, IL: Joint Commission.
The Joint Commission's annual report summarizes hospital performance across a broad range of metrics that represent evidence-based standards for high-quality care. These accountability measures have been shown to be directly linked to patient outcomes. Since the report's first publication in 2007, data demonstrates that hospitals have measurably improved quality of care for heart attacks, pneumonia, surgical care, children's asthma care, inpatient psychiatric services, venous thromboembolism, and stroke patients.
Hospira Carpuject pre-filled cartridges—drug alert: products may contain more than the intended fill volume.
MedWatch Safety Alert. Silver Spring, MD: US Food and Drug Administration; May 23, 2012.
This announcement raises awareness of pre-filled medication cartridges that may be overfilled, thereby increasing the risk of overdose. The FDA recommends that practitioners confirm the dosage prior to dispensing and administering the medication.
O'Reilly KB. American Medical News. August 15, 2011.
This news article reports on health care providers who have publicly revealed direct involvement in cases of medical errors, with a goal of encouraging open disclosure, encouraging safety checks, and improving patient safety.
Ginsburg M, Glasmire K. Oakland, CA: California HealthCare Foundation; April 2011.
Examining consumers' opinions on health care quality and safety, this report offers recommendations for hospitals to prioritize improvement efforts.
Weinstock M. Hosp Health Netw. 2011 Apr;85:46-49, 2.
This article discusses one hospital system's effort to hardwire safety into daily work by having providers look at each patient as a loved one.
Allen M. Washington Monthly. March/April 2011.
This magazine article reports on medical errors in the United States health care system and discusses transparency as a tactic to improve patient safety.
Bogdanich W, Rebelo K. New York Times. December 28, 2010;A1.
This article explores inaccuracy of dosage, lack of protocol adherence, and absence of transparency as trends that hinder learning from radiological adverse events.