Gordon D Schiff1, Harry Reyes Nieva, Paula Griswold, Nicholas Leydon, Judy Ling, Frank Federico, Carol Keohane, Bonnie R Ellis, Cathy Foskett, E John Orav, Catherine Yoon, Don Goldmann, Joel S Weissman, David W Bates, Madeleine Biondolillo, Sara J Singer. 1. *Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital †Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA ‡Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD §Massachusetts Coalition for the Prevention of Medical Errors, Burlington ∥Bureau of Health Care Safety and Quality, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Boston, MA ¶North Shore Medical Center, Salem #Institute for Healthcare Improvement, Cambridge **Risk Management Foundation of the Harvard Medical Institutions (CRICO) ††Coverys Corporation; One Financial Center ‡‡Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health §§Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital ∥∥Mongan Institute for Health Policy, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate application of quality improvement approaches to key ambulatory malpractice risk and safety areas. STUDY SETTING: In total, 25 small-to-medium-sized primary care practices (16 intervention; 9 control) in Massachusetts. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled trial of a 15-month intervention including exposure to a learning network, webinars, face-to-face meetings, and coaching by improvement advisors targeting "3+1" high-risk domains: test result, referral, and medication management plus culture/communication issues evaluated by survey and chart review tools. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: Chart reviews conducted at baseline and postintervention for intervention sites. Staff and patient survey data collected at baseline and postintervention for intervention and control sites. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Chart reviews demonstrated significant improvements in documentation of abnormal results, patient notification, documentation of an action or treatment plan, and evidence of a completed plan (all P<0.001). Mean days between laboratory test date and evidence of completed action/treatment plan decreased by 19.4 days (P<0.001). Staff surveys showed modest but nonsignificant improvement for intervention practices relative to controls overall and for the 3 high-risk domains that were the focus of PROMISES. CONCLUSIONS: A consortium of stakeholders, quality improvement tools, coaches, and learning network decreased selected ambulatory safety risks often seen in malpractice claims.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate application of quality improvement approaches to key ambulatory malpractice risk and safety areas. STUDY SETTING: In total, 25 small-to-medium-sized primary care practices (16 intervention; 9 control) in Massachusetts. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled trial of a 15-month intervention including exposure to a learning network, webinars, face-to-face meetings, and coaching by improvement advisors targeting "3+1" high-risk domains: test result, referral, and medication management plus culture/communication issues evaluated by survey and chart review tools. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: Chart reviews conducted at baseline and postintervention for intervention sites. Staff and patient survey data collected at baseline and postintervention for intervention and control sites. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Chart reviews demonstrated significant improvements in documentation of abnormal results, patient notification, documentation of an action or treatment plan, and evidence of a completed plan (all P<0.001). Mean days between laboratory test date and evidence of completed action/treatment plan decreased by 19.4 days (P<0.001). Staff surveys showed modest but nonsignificant improvement for intervention practices relative to controls overall and for the 3 high-risk domains that were the focus of PROMISES. CONCLUSIONS: A consortium of stakeholders, quality improvement tools, coaches, and learning network decreased selected ambulatory safety risks often seen in malpractice claims.
Authors: Edward H Wagner; Katie Coleman; Robert J Reid; Kathryn Phillips; Melinda K Abrams; Jonathan R Sugarman Journal: Prim Care Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 2.907
Authors: Benjamin F Crabtree; Sabrina M Chase; Christopher G Wise; Gordon D Schiff; Laura A Schmidt; Jeanette R Goyzueta; Rebecca A Malouin; Susan M C Payne; Michael T Quinn; Paul A Nutting; William L Miller; Carlos Roberto Jaén Journal: Med Care Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Sara J Singer; Harry Reyes Nieva; Namara Brede; Judy Ling; Nicholas Leydon; Joel S Weissman; Don Goldmann; Paula Griswold; Catherine Yoon; E John Orav; David W Bates; Madeleine Biondolillo; Gordon D Schiff Journal: Med Care Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Gordon D Schiff; Harry Reyes Nieva; Paula Griswold; Nicholas Leydon; Judy Ling; Madeleine Biondolillo; Sara J Singer Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Mark W Friedberg; Meredith B Rosenthal; Rachel M Werner; Kevin G Volpp; Eric C Schneider Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Benjamin F Crabtree; Paul A Nutting; William L Miller; Reuben R McDaniel; Kurt C Stange; Carlos Roberto Jaen; Elizabeth Stewart Journal: Med Care Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Gordon D Schiff; Ann Louise Puopolo; Anne Huben-Kearney; Winnie Yu; Carol Keohane; Peggy McDonough; Bonnie R Ellis; David W Bates; Madeleine Biondolillo Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2013 Dec 9-23 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Susanne Hempel; Maria Bolshakova; Barbara J Turner; Jennifer Dinalo; Danielle Rose; Aneesa Motala; Ning Fu; Chase G Clemesha; Lisa Rubenstein; Susan Stockdale Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2022-09-29 Impact factor: 6.473
Authors: Ronen Rozenblum; Rosa Rodriguez-Monguio; Lynn A Volk; Katherine J Forsythe; Sara Myers; Maria McGurrin; Deborah H Williams; David W Bates; Gordon Schiff; Enrique Seoane-Vazquez Journal: Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf Date: 2019-11-27
Authors: Andrew Georgiou; Julie Li; Judith Thomas; Maria R Dahm; Johanna I Westbrook Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 4.497