Literature DB >> 21587117

Consensus building for development of outpatient adverse drug event triggers.

Hillary J Mull1, Jonathan R Nebeker, Stephanie L Shimada, Haytham M A Kaafarani, Peter E Rivard, Amy K Rosen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Adverse drug event (ADE) detection is an important priority of patient safety research. Trigger tools have been developed to help identify ADEs. As part of a larger study, we developed complex and specific trigger algorithms intended for concurrent use with clinical care to detect outpatient ADEs. This article assesses the use of a modified Delphi process to obtain expert consensus on the value of these triggers.
METHODS: We selected a panel of distinguished clinical and research experts to participate in the modified Delphi process. We created a set of outpatient ADE triggers based on literature review, clinical input, and methodological expertise. The importance of the targeted ADEs, associated drug classes, and trigger logic was used to rate each trigger. Specific criteria were developed to establish consensus.
RESULTS: The modified Delphi process established consensus on 6 outpatient ADE triggers to test with patient-level data based on high ratings of utility for patient-level interventions. These triggers focused on detecting ADEs caused by the following drugs or drug classes: bone marrow toxins, potassium raisers, potassium reducers, creatinine, warfarin, and sedative hypnotics. Participants reported including all aspects of the trigger in their ratings, despite our efforts to separate evaluation of clinical need and trigger logic. Participants' expertise affected the evaluation of trigger rules, leading to contradictory feedback on how to improve trigger design.
CONCLUSIONS: The efficiency of the modified Delphi method could be improved by allowing participants to produce an overall summary score that incorporates both the clinical value and the general logic of the trigger. Revising and improving trigger design should be conducted in a separate process limited only to trigger experts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21587117      PMCID: PMC4558884          DOI: 10.1097/PTS.0b013e31820c98ba

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Patient Saf        ISSN: 1549-8417            Impact factor:   2.844


  18 in total

1.  Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences.

Authors:  C C Preston; A M Colman
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2000-03

2.  Methodology and rationale for the measurement of harm with trigger tools.

Authors:  R K Resar; J D Rozich; D Classen
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2003-12

3.  A method for the detailed assessment of the appropriateness of medical technologies.

Authors:  R H Brook; M R Chassin; A Fink; D H Solomon; J Kosecoff; R E Park
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 2.188

4.  Current state of information technology use in a US primary care practice-based research network.

Authors:  James E Andrews; Kevin A Pearce; Carey Sydney; Carol Ireson; Margaret Love
Journal:  Inform Prim Care       Date:  2004

5.  Using computer technology to detect, measure, and prevent adverse drug events.

Authors:  Reed M Gardner; R Scott Evans
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2004 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  Computerized surveillance of adverse drug events in hospital patients. 1991.

Authors:  D C Classen; S L Pestotnik; R S Evans; J P Burke
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2005-06

7.  Reduction in anticoagulation-related adverse drug events using a trigger-based methodology.

Authors:  Jim Lederer; Diana Best
Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf       Date:  2005-06

8.  National surveillance of emergency department visits for outpatient adverse drug events.

Authors:  Daniel S Budnitz; Daniel A Pollock; Kelly N Weidenbach; Aaron B Mendelsohn; Thomas J Schroeder; Joseph L Annest
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-10-18       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Using trigger phrases to detect adverse drug reactions in ambulatory care notes.

Authors:  Michael N Cantor; Henry J Feldman; Marc M Triola
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2007-04

Review 10.  Systematic review of the incidence and characteristics of preventable adverse drug events in ambulatory care.

Authors:  Linda Aagaard Thomsen; Almut G Winterstein; Birthe Søndergaard; Lotte Stig Haugbølle; Arne Melander
Journal:  Ann Pharmacother       Date:  2007-07-31       Impact factor: 3.154

View more
  5 in total

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

Authors:  Guillaume Hébert; Florence Netzer; Sylvain Landry Kouakou; François Lemare; Etienne Minvielle
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2018-02-14

2.  Development of a standardized chart review method to identify drug-related hospital admissions in older people.

Authors:  Stefanie Thevelin; Anne Spinewine; Jean-Baptiste Beuscart; Benoit Boland; Sophie Marien; Fanny Vaillant; Ingeborg Wilting; Ariel Vondeling; Carmen Floriani; Claudio Schneider; Jacques Donzé; Nicolas Rodondi; Shane Cullinan; Denis O'Mahony; Olivia Dalleur
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2018-08-17       Impact factor: 4.335

3.  Assessing the potential adoption and usefulness of concurrent, action-oriented, electronic adverse drug event triggers designed for the outpatient setting.

Authors:  Hillary J Mull; Amy K Rosen; Stephanie L Shimada; Peter E Rivard; Brian Nordberg; Brenna Long; Jennifer M Hoffman; Molly Leecaster; Lucy A Savitz; Christopher W Shanahan; Amy Helwig; Jonathan R Nebeker
Journal:  EGEMS (Wash DC)       Date:  2015-04-30

4.  Reliability of Goldberg Scoring System in the Radiographic Evaluation of Bony Union after Bone Grafting.

Authors:  Young Choi; Young Hoon Yang; Young-Ho Kwon
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2021-11-15

5.  Improving Patient Safety in Public Hospitals: Developing Standard Measures to Track Medical Errors and Process Breakdowns.

Authors:  Sara L Ackerman; Gato Gourley; Gem Le; Pamela Williams; Jinoos Yazdany; Urmimala Sarkar
Journal:  J Patient Saf       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 2.844

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.