Kathleen Wittels1, Emily Aaronson1,2, Richard Dwyer1, Eric Nadel1,2, Fiona Gallahue3, Christopher Fee4, Robert Tubbs5, Jeremiah Schuur1. 1. Brigham and Women's Hospital Harvard Medical School Boston MA. 2. Massachusetts General Hospital Harvard Medical School Boston MA. 3. University of Washington School of Medicine Seattle WA. 4. University of California San Francisco School of Medicine San Francisco CA. 5. Warren Alpert Medical School at Brown University Providence RI.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Morbidity and mortality conference (M&M) is common in emergency medicine (EM) and an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirement. We aimed to characterize the prevalence of elements of EM M&M conferences that foster a strong culture of safety. METHODS: Emergency medicine residents at 33 programs across the United States were surveyed using questions adapted from a previously tested survey of EM program directors and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Culture of Safety Survey. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 80.3% (1,002/1,248). A total of 60.3% (601/997) of residents had not submitted a case of theirs to M&M in the past year. A total of 7.6% (73/954) reported that issues raised at M&M always led to change while 88.3% (842/954) reported that they sometimes did and 4.1% (39/954) reported that they never did. A total of 56.2% (536/954) responded that changes made due to M&M were reported back to the residents. Of residents who had cases presented at M&M, 24.2% (130/538) responded that there was regular debriefing, 65.2% (351/538) responded that there was not, and 10.6% (57/578) were unsure. A total of 10.2% (101/988) of respondents agreed that M&M was punitive, 17.4% were neutral (172/988), and 72.4% (715/988) disagreed. A total of 18.0% (178/987) of residents agreed that they felt pressure to order unnecessary tests because of M&M, 22.3% (220/987) were neutral, and 59.6% (589/987) disagreed. A total of 87.4% (862/986) felt that M&M was a valuable educational didactic session, and 78.3% (766/978) believed that M&M contributes to a culture of safety in their institution. CONCLUSIONS: While most residents believe that M&M is a valuable didactic session and contributes to institutional culture of safety, there are opportunities to improve by communicating changes made in response to M&M, debriefing residents who have had cases presented, and taking steps to make M&M not feel punitive to some residents.
OBJECTIVE: Morbidity and mortality conference (M&M) is common in emergency medicine (EM) and an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirement. We aimed to characterize the prevalence of elements of EM M&M conferences that foster a strong culture of safety. METHODS: Emergency medicine residents at 33 programs across the United States were surveyed using questions adapted from a previously tested survey of EM program directors and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Culture of Safety Survey. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 80.3% (1,002/1,248). A total of 60.3% (601/997) of residents had not submitted a case of theirs to M&M in the past year. A total of 7.6% (73/954) reported that issues raised at M&M always led to change while 88.3% (842/954) reported that they sometimes did and 4.1% (39/954) reported that they never did. A total of 56.2% (536/954) responded that changes made due to M&M were reported back to the residents. Of residents who had cases presented at M&M, 24.2% (130/538) responded that there was regular debriefing, 65.2% (351/538) responded that there was not, and 10.6% (57/578) were unsure. A total of 10.2% (101/988) of respondents agreed that M&M was punitive, 17.4% were neutral (172/988), and 72.4% (715/988) disagreed. A total of 18.0% (178/987) of residents agreed that they felt pressure to order unnecessary tests because of M&M, 22.3% (220/987) were neutral, and 59.6% (589/987) disagreed. A total of 87.4% (862/986) felt that M&M was a valuable educational didactic session, and 78.3% (766/978) believed that M&M contributes to a culture of safety in their institution. CONCLUSIONS: While most residents believe that M&M is a valuable didactic session and contributes to institutional culture of safety, there are opportunities to improve by communicating changes made in response to M&M, debriefing residents who have had cases presented, and taking steps to make M&M not feel punitive to some residents.
Authors: Mary VanOyen Force; Linda Deering; John Hubbe; Marcy Andersen; Barbara Hagemann; Michelle Cooper-Hahn; William Peters Journal: J Nurs Adm Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 1.737
Authors: Rebecca Smith-Coggins; Catherine A Marco; Jill M Baren; Michael S Beeson; Michael L Carius; Francis L Counselman; Barry N Heller; Terry Kowalenko; Robert L Muelleman; Lewis S Nelson; Robert P Wahl; Robert C Korte; Kevin B Joldersma Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Terri P McVeigh; Peadar S Waters; Ruth Murphy; Gerrard T O'Donoghue; Ray McLaughlin; Michael J Kerin Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2012-11-02 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Christine E Sammer; Kristine Lykens; Karan P Singh; Douglas A Mains; Nuha A Lackan Journal: J Nurs Scholarsh Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 3.176
Authors: Joseph A Grubenhoff; Sonja I Ziniel; Christina L Cifra; Geeta Singhal; Richard E McClead; Hardeep Singh Journal: Pediatr Qual Saf Date: 2020-02-27
Authors: Emily L Aaronson; Kathleen Wittels; Richard Dwyer; Eric Nadel; Fiona Gallahue; Olesya Baker; Christopher Fee; Robert Tubbs; Jeremiah Schuur Journal: West J Emerg Med Date: 2019-12-19