Hillary J Mull1, Caitlin W Brennan, Tiffany Folkes, John Hermos, Jeffrey Chan, Amy K Rosen, Steven R Simon. 1. Measurement to Assess Patient Safety, Patient Safety Center of Inquiry (Drs Mull, Brennan, Rosen, and Simon and Mr Chan), Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (Drs Mull, Rosen, and Simon and Mr Chan), Department of Nursing (Ms Folkes), and Section of General Internal Medicine (Drs Hermos and Simon), VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts (Drs Mull and Rosen); Clinical Center Nursing Department, Research and Practice Development Section, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (Dr Brennan); and Division of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts (Dr Simon).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adverse event (AE) surveillance may be enhanced by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Global Trigger Tool (GTT). A pilot study of the GTT was conducted in one Veterans Health Administration (VA) facility to assess the rates, types, and harm of AEs detected and to examine the overlap in AE detection between the GTT and existing surveillance mechanisms. METHODS: GTT guidelines were followed and medical records were reviewed for 17 weeks of acute care hospitalizations. Investigators met monthly, first to adjudicate discordant reviewer categorizations of harm and later to categorize the AEs detected using standardized definitions. GTT-detected AEs were compared with incident reports, Patient Safety Indicators, and the VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program. RESULTS: Medical records were reviewed for 273 of 1980 eligible cases. Using the GTT, a total of 109 AEs were identified. More than 1 of 5 hospitalizations (21%) were associated with an AE. The majority of AEs detected (60%) were minor harms; there were no deaths attributable to medical care. Ninety-six of the 109 AEs (88%) were not detected by other measures. CONCLUSIONS: The GTT identified previously undetected AEs at one VA. The GTT has the potential to track AEs and guide quality improvement efforts in conjunction with existing AE surveillance mechanisms.
BACKGROUND: Adverse event (AE) surveillance may be enhanced by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Global Trigger Tool (GTT). A pilot study of the GTT was conducted in one Veterans Health Administration (VA) facility to assess the rates, types, and harm of AEs detected and to examine the overlap in AE detection between the GTT and existing surveillance mechanisms. METHODS:GTT guidelines were followed and medical records were reviewed for 17 weeks of acute care hospitalizations. Investigators met monthly, first to adjudicate discordant reviewer categorizations of harm and later to categorize the AEs detected using standardized definitions. GTT-detected AEs were compared with incident reports, Patient Safety Indicators, and the VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program. RESULTS: Medical records were reviewed for 273 of 1980 eligible cases. Using the GTT, a total of 109 AEs were identified. More than 1 of 5 hospitalizations (21%) were associated with an AE. The majority of AEs detected (60%) were minor harms; there were no deaths attributable to medical care. Ninety-six of the 109 AEs (88%) were not detected by other measures. CONCLUSIONS: The GTT identified previously undetected AEs at one VA. The GTT has the potential to track AEs and guide quality improvement efforts in conjunction with existing AE surveillance mechanisms.
Authors: L L Leape; T A Brennan; N Laird; A G Lawthers; A R Localio; B A Barnes; L Hebert; J P Newhouse; P C Weiler; H Hiatt Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1991-02-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Paul R Garrett; Christine Sammer; Antoinette Nelson; Kathleen A Paisley; Cason Jones; Eve Shapiro; Jackie Tonkel; Michael Housman Journal: Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf Date: 2013-07
Authors: Christopher P Landrigan; Gareth J Parry; Catherine B Bones; Andrew D Hackbarth; Donald A Goldmann; Paul J Sharek Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-11-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David C Classen; Roger Resar; Frances Griffin; Frank Federico; Terri Frankel; Nancy Kimmel; John C Whittington; Allan Frankel; Andrew Seger; Brent C James Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Eric S Kirkendall; Elizabeth Kloppenborg; James Papp; Denise White; Carol Frese; Deborah Hacker; Pamela J Schoettker; Stephen Muething; Uma Kotagal Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2012-10-08 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Heather Sherman; Gerard Castro; Martin Fletcher; Martin Hatlie; Peter Hibbert; Robert Jakob; Richard Koss; Pierre Lewalle; Jerod Loeb; Thomas Perneger; William Runciman; Richard Thomson; Tjerk Van Der Schaaf; Martti Virtanen Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: Hillary J Mull; Kamal M F Itani; Steven D Pizer; Martin P Charns; Peter E Rivard; Nathalie McIntosh; Mary T Hawn; Amy K Rosen Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2018-08-27 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Luisa C Eggenschwiler; Anne W S Rutjes; Sarah N Musy; Dietmar Ausserhofer; Natascha M Nielen; René Schwendimann; Maria Unbeck; Michael Simon Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Saul N Weingart; Jason Nelson; Benjamin Koethe; Omar Yaghi; Stephan Dunning; Albert Feldman; David M Kent; Allison Lipitz-Snyderman Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2020-01-03 Impact factor: 4.452