Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

David W Bates

Publications and source records attributed to David W Bates.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Ten commandments for effective clinical decision support: making the practice of evidence-based medicine a reality.

While evidence-based medicine has increasingly broad-based support in health care, it remains difficult to get physicians to actually practice it. Across most domains in medicine, practice has lagged behind knowledge by at least several years. The authors believe that the key tools for closing this gap will be information systems that provide decision support to users at the time they make decisions, which should result in improved quality of care. Furthermore, providers make many errors, and clinical decision support can be useful for finding and preventing such errors. Over the last eight years the authors have implemented and studied the impact of decision support across a broad array of domains and have found a number of common elements important to success. The goal of this report is to discuss these lessons learned in the interest of informing the efforts of others working to make the practice of evidence-based medicine a reality.

Decision Making, Computer-Assisted↗
PubMed2003

Effects of computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems on medication safety: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Iatrogenic injuries related to medications are common, costly, and clinically significant. Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) and clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) may reduce medication error rates. METHODS: We identified trials that evaluated the effects of CPOE and CDSSs on medication safety by electronically searching MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library and by manually searching the bibliographies of retrieved articles. Studies were included for systematic review if the design was a randomized controlled trial, a nonrandomized controlled trial, or an observational study with controls and if the measured outcomes were clinical (eg, adverse drug events) or surrogate (eg, medication errors) markers. Two reviewers extracted all the data. Discussion resolved any disagreements. RESULTS: Five trials assessing CPOE and 7 assessing isolated CDSSs met the criteria. Of the CPOE studies, 2 demonstrated a marked decrease in the serious medication error rate, 1 an improvement in corollary orders, 1 an improvement in 5 prescribing behaviors, and 1 an improvement in nephrotoxic drug dose and frequency. Of the 7 studies evaluating isolated CDSSs, 3 demonstrated statistically significant improvements in antibiotic-associated medication errors or adverse drug events and 1 an improvement in theophylline-associated medication errors. The remaining 3 studies had nonsignificant results. CONCLUSIONS: Use of CPOE and isolated CDSSs can substantially reduce medication error rates, but most studies have not been powered to detect differences in adverse drug events and have evaluated a small number of "homegrown" systems. Research is needed to evaluate commercial systems, to compare the various applications, to identify key components of applications, and to identify factors related to successful implementation of these systems.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2003

Linking laboratory and pharmacy: opportunities for reducing errors and improving care.

A myriad of errors and lost improvement opportunities result from failure of clinical laboratory and pharmacy information systems to effectively communicate. Pharmacotherapy could benefit from enhanced laboratory-pharmacy linkage with respect to (1) drug choice (laboratory-based indications and contraindications), (2) drug dosing (renal or hepatic, blood level-guided adjustments), (3) laboratory monitoring (laboratory signals of toxicity, baseline and ongoing monitoring), (4) laboratory result interpretation (drug interfering with test), and (5) broader quality improvement (surveillance for unrecognized toxicity, monitoring clinician response delays). Linkages can be retrospective or real-time. Many organizations could benefit now by linking existing pharmacy and laboratory data. Greater improvement is possible through implementation of electronic order entry with real-time decision support incorporating linked laboratory and pharmacy data. While many guidelines, admonitions, and rules exist regarding drugs and the laboratory, substantial new knowledge and evidence in this area are needed. Focusing on these unmet needs and accompanying logistical challenges is a priority.

Clinical Laboratory Information Systems↗
PubMed2003

Adverse drug events in ambulatory care.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events related to drugs occur frequently among inpatients, and many of these events are preventable. However, few data are available on adverse drug events among outpatients. We conducted a study to determine the rates, types, severity, and preventability of such events among outpatients and to identify preventive strategies. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study, including a survey of patients and a chart review, at four adult primary care practices in Boston (two hospital-based and two community-based), involving a total of 1202 outpatients who received at least one prescription during a four-week period. Prescriptions were computerized at two of the practices and handwritten at the other two. RESULTS: Of the 661 patients who responded to the survey (response rate, 55 percent), 162 had adverse drug events (25 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 20 to 29 percent), with a total of 181 events (27 per 100 patients). Twenty-four of the events (13 percent) were serious, 51 (28 percent) were ameliorable, and 20 (11 percent) were preventable. Of the 51 ameliorable events, 32 (63 percent) were attributed to the physician's failure to respond to medication-related symptoms and 19 (37 percent) to the patient's failure to inform the physician of the symptoms. The medication classes most frequently involved in adverse drug events were selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (10 percent), beta-blockers (9 percent), angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (8 percent), and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory agents (8 percent). On multivariate analysis, only the number of medications taken was significantly associated with adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse events related to drugs are common in primary care, and many are preventable or ameliorable. Monitoring for and acting on symptoms are important. Improving communication between outpatients and providers may help prevent adverse events related to drugs.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

A cost-benefit analysis of electronic medical records in primary care.

Electronic medical record systems improve the quality of patient care and decrease medical errors, but their financial effects have not been as well documented. The purpose of this study was to estimate the net financial benefit or cost of implementing electronic medical record systems in primary care. We performed a cost-benefit study to analyze the financial effects of electronic medical record systems in ambulatory primary care settings from the perspective of the health care organization. Data were obtained from studies at our institution and from the published literature. The reference strategy for comparisons was the traditional paper-based medical record. The primary outcome measure was the net financial benefit or cost per primary care physician for a 5-year period. The estimated net benefit from using an electronic medical record for a 5-year period was 86,400 US dollars per provider. Benefits accrue primarily from savings in drug expenditures, improved utilization of radiology tests, better capture of charges, and decreased billing errors. In one-way sensitivity analyses, the model was most sensitive to the proportion of patients whose care was capitated; the net benefit varied from a low of 8400 US dollars to a high of 140,100 US dollars . A five-way sensitivity analysis with the most pessimistic and optimistic assumptions showed results ranging from a 2300 US dollars net cost to a 330,900 US dollars net benefit. Implementation of an electronic medical record system in primary care can result in a positive financial return on investment to the health care organization. The magnitude of the return is sensitive to several key factors.

Computers↗
PubMed2003

Electronically screening discharge summaries for adverse medical events.

OBJECTIVE: Detecting adverse events is pivotal for measuring and improving medical safety, yet current techniques discourage routine screening. The authors hypothesized that discharge summaries would include information on adverse events, and they developed and evaluated an electronic method for screening medical discharge summaries for adverse events. DESIGN: A cohort study including 424 randomly selected admissions to the medical services of an academic medical center was conducted between January and July 2000. The authors developed a computerized screening tool that searched free-text discharge summaries for trigger words representing possible adverse events. MEASUREMENTS: All discharge summaries with a trigger word present underwent chart review by two independent physician reviewers. The presence of adverse events was assessed using structured implicit judgment. A random sample of discharge summaries without trigger words also was reviewed. RESULTS: Fifty-nine percent (251 of 424) of the discharge summaries contained trigger words. Based on discharge summary review, 44.8% (327 of 730) of the alerted trigger words indicated a possible adverse event. After medical record review, the tool detected 131 adverse events. The sensitivity and specificity of the screening tool were 69% and 48%, respectively. The positive predictive value of the tool was 52%. CONCLUSION: Medical discharge summaries contain information regarding adverse events. Electronic screening of discharge summaries for adverse events using keyword searches is feasible but thus far has poor specificity. Nonetheless, computerized clinical narrative screening methods could potentially offer researchers and quality managers a means to routinely detect adverse events.

Cohort Studies↗
PubMed2003

Severe sepsis: variation in resource and therapeutic modality use among academic centers.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of severe sepsis is expensive, often encompassing a number of discretionary modalities. The objective of the present study was to assess intercenter variation in resource and therapeutic modality use in patients with severe sepsis. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of 1028 adult admissions with severe sepsis from a stratified random sample of patients admitted to eight academic tertiary care centers. The main outcome measures were length of stay (LOS; total LOS and LOS after onset of severe sepsis) and total hospital charges. RESULTS: The adjusted mean total hospital charges varied from 69 429 dollars to US237 898 dollars across centers, whereas the adjusted LOS after onset varied from 15.9 days to 24.2 days per admission. Treatments used frequently after the first onset of sepsis among patients with severe sepsis were pulmonary artery catheters (19.4%), ventilator support (21.8%), pressor support (45.8%) and albumin infusion (14.4%). Pulmonary artery catheter use, ventilator support and albumin infusion had moderate variation profiles, varying 3.2-fold to 4.9-fold, whereas the rate of pressor support varied only 1.92-fold across centers. Even after adjusting for age, sex, Charlson comorbidity score, discharge diagnosis-relative group weight, organ dysfunction and service at onset, the odds for using these therapeutic modalities still varied significantly across centers. Failure to start antibiotics within 24 hours was strongly correlated with a higher probability of 28-day mortality (r2 = 0.72). CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate moderate but significant variation in resource use and use of technologies in treatment of severe sepsis among academic centers. Delay in antibiotic therapy was associated with worse outcome at the center level.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed2003

Incidence and preventability of adverse drug events among older persons in the ambulatory setting.

CONTEXT: Adverse drug events, especially those that may be preventable, are among the most serious concerns about medication use in older persons cared for in the ambulatory clinical setting. OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence and preventability of adverse drug events among older persons in the ambulatory clinical setting. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Cohort study of all Medicare enrollees (30 397 person-years of observation) cared for by a multispecialty group practice during a 12-month study period (July 1, 1999, through June 30, 2000), in which possible drug-related incidents occurring in the ambulatory clinical setting were detected using multiple methods, including reports from health care providers; review of hospital discharge summaries; review of emergency department notes; computer-generated signals; automated free-text review of electronic clinic notes; and review of administrative incident reports concerning medication errors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of adverse drug events, severity of the events (classified as significant, serious, life-threatening, or fatal), and whether the events were preventable. RESULTS: There were 1523 identified adverse drug events, of which 27.6% (421) were considered preventable. The overall rate of adverse drug events was 50.1 per 1000 person-years, with a rate of 13.8 preventable adverse drug events per 1000 person-years. Of the adverse drug events, 578 (38.0%) were categorized as serious, life-threatening, or fatal; 244 (42.2%) of these more severe events were deemed preventable compared with 177 (18.7%) of the 945 significant adverse drug events. Errors associated with preventable adverse drug events occurred most often at the stages of prescribing (n = 246, 58.4%) and monitoring (n = 256, 60.8%), and errors involving patient adherence (n = 89, 21.1%) also were common. Cardiovascular medications (24.5%), followed by diuretics (22.1%), nonopioid analgesics (15.4%), hypoglycemics (10.9%), and anticoagulants (10.2%) were the most common medication categories associated with preventable adverse drug events. Electrolyte/renal (26.6%), gastrointestinal tract (21.1%), hemorrhagic (15.9%), metabolic/endocrine (13.8%), and neuropsychiatric (8.6%) events were the most common types of preventable adverse drug events. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse drug events are common and often preventable among older persons in the ambulatory clinical setting. More serious adverse drug events are more likely to be preventable. Prevention strategies should target the prescribing and monitoring stages of pharmaceutical care. Interventions focused on improving patient adherence with prescribed regimens and monitoring of prescribed medications also may be beneficial.

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems↗
PubMed2003

The incidence and severity of adverse events affecting patients after discharge from the hospital.

BACKGROUND: Studies of hospitalized patients identify safety as a significant problem, but few data are available regarding injuries occurring after discharge. Patients may be vulnerable during this transition period. OBJECTIVE: To describe the incidence, severity, preventability, and "ameliorability" of adverse events affecting patients after discharge from the hospital and to develop strategies for improving patient safety during this interval. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: A tertiary care academic hospital. PATIENTS: 400 consecutive patients discharged home from the general medical service. MEASUREMENTS: The three main outcomes were adverse events, defined as injuries occurring as a result of medical management; preventable adverse events, defined as adverse events judged to have been caused by an error; and ameliorable adverse events, defined as adverse events whose severity could have been decreased. Posthospital course was determined by performing a medical record review and a structured telephone interview approximately 3 weeks after each patient's discharge. Outcomes were determined by independent physician reviews. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients had adverse events after discharge (19% [95% CI, 15% to 23%]). Of these, 23 had preventable adverse events (6% [CI, 4% to 9%]) and 24 had ameliorable adverse events (6% [CI, 4% to 9%]). Three percent of injuries were serious laboratory abnormalities, 65% were symptoms, 30% were symptoms associated with a nonpermanent disability, and 3% were permanent disabilities. Adverse drug events were the most common type of adverse event (66% [CI, 55% to 76%]), followed by procedure-related injuries (17% [CI, 8% to 26%]). Of the 25 adverse events resulting in at least a nonpermanent disability, 12 were preventable (48% [CI, 28% to 68%]) and 6 were ameliorable (24% [CI, 7% to 41%]). CONCLUSION: Adverse events occurred frequently in the peridischarge period, and many could potentially have been prevented or ameliorated with simple strategies.

Diagnostic Errors↗
PubMed2003

Major adverse outcomes after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: a clinical prediction rule.

In this study, we developed and internally validated a clinical model for predicting major adverse outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) using a multi-institutional prospective cohort study involving all adult patients who underwent PTCA at 12 participating institutions from August 1993 to October 1995. A major adverse outcome, defined as death, renal failure, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, stroke, or coma, occurred in 3.3 and 3.2% of patients in the derivation and validation sets, respectively. Death occurred in 1.5% in both sets. Fourteen variables were independently correlated with major adverse outcomes. The rule, which stratifies PTCA patients into six levels of risk based on the severity score, showed excellent discrimination (receiver-operating characteristic curve area 0.82) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow chi-square statistic P =.90) and performed well on internal validation. This rule allows accurate preprocedure stratification of PTCA candidates according to their risk of suffering a major adverse outcome.

Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary↗
PubMed2003

Is terminology used effectively to convey diagnostic certainty in radiology reports?

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to assess the extent of agreement among radiologists and nonradiologists in perception of diagnostic certainty conveyed by words and phrases commonly used in radiology reports. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was performed in a large academic radiology department. To determine the commonly used terminology for conveying diagnostic certainty in radiology reports, 12 randomly selected radiologists from six different subspecialties were interviewed. The authors identified the 15 most commonly used words and phrases and included these in random order in a questionnaire sent to all staff radiologists (n = 45) and to 158 referring physicians. Physicians were asked to rank the 15 phrases in order of the diagnostic certainty conveyed by each, from 1 (most certain) to 15 (least certain), using each number only once. The kappa statistic was used to assess agreement in rank order among physicians. RESULTS: The questionnaire response rate was 76% (n = 34) for radiologists and 49% (n = 78) for nonradiologists. There was excellent agreement among radiologists (kappa = 0.95) and nonradiologists (kappa = 0.93) in the rank order for the phrase diagnostic of. Although there was good agreement (kappa = 0.45) among radiologists for the word unlikely, agreement among nonradiologists was poor (kappa = 0.27). There was very poor agreement among all physicians for the rank order of the other 13 phrases. CONCLUSION: Among radiologists and nonradiologists, concordance was poor regarding the diagnostic certainty associated with phrases commonly used in radiology reports. Because poor agreement could lead to suboptimal quality of care, the standardization of terminology would benefit all parties.

Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures↗
PubMed2003

Opportunities to enhance patient and physician e-mail contact.

The purpose of our study was to evaluate how e-mail is currently used between physicians and patients in an integrated delivery system, and to identify developments that might promote increased use of this form of communication. A paper-based survey questionnaire was administered to 94 primary care physicians. We evaluated the role e-mail currently plays in a physician's typical work day, physician views on the impact of e-mail on phone use and the barriers to increasing the use of e-mail with patients. 76% of physicians surveyed responded. All respondents currently use e-mail. Close to 75% of physicians use e-mail with their patients, but the vast majority do so with only 1-5% of those patients. 50% of physicians believe that up to 25% of their patients would send e-mail to them if given the option, with an additional 37% believing that between 25% and 50% of patients would value this option. The main reported barriers to physician-patient e-mail related to workload, security and payment. Our survey findings indicate that with adequate pre-screening, triage, and reimbursement mechanisms physicians would be open to substantially increasing e-mail communication with patients.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2003

What do we know about medication errors in inpatient psychiatry?

BACKGROUND: Adverse drug events (ADEs) have been implicated as a cause of substantial morbidity and mortality. Psychiatrists have successfully characterized one category of ADE--adverse drug reactions (ADRs), which have been studied from a medication-specific psychopharmacology frame of reference. The literature on ADEs, both preventable and nonpreventable, was reviewed within the broader patient safety framework. METHODS: English-language studies involving ADEs and medication errors in psychiatry for 1996 through 2003 were identified on MEDLINE and by using a hand search of bibliographies. RESULTS: Few reports on the incidence and characteristics of medication errors in psychiatric hospitals could be found. Psychiatrists may not be sufficiently aware of the harm caused by errors, methodological issues regarding error detection, the validity of reported medication error rates, and the challenge of creating a nonpunitive error-reporting culture. PREVENTION STRATEGIES: Application of a systems-oriented approach to ADE reduction and the promotion of a nonpunitive culture are essential. Clinical and pharmacy staff could monitor the literature for published reports of preventable adverse events and review those reports in multidisciplinary team meetings. CONCLUSIONS: Psychiatry would benefit from learning about the terminology used in describing medication errors and ADEs. Relatively few data are available regarding the frequency and consequences of medication errors in psychiatry; more research is needed.

Antipsychotic Agents↗
PubMed2003

Resource utilization among patients with sepsis syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the resource utilization associated with sepsis syndrome in academic medical centers. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Eight academic, tertiary-care centers. PATIENTS: Stratified random sample of 1,028 adult admissions with sepsis syndrome and all 248,761 other adult admissions between January 1993 and April 1994. The main outcome measures were length of stay (LOS) in total and after onset of sepsis syndrome (post-onset LOS) and total hospital charges. RESULTS: The mean LOS for patients with sepsis was 27.7 +/- 0.9 days (median, 20 days), with sepsis onset occurring after a mean of 8.1 +/- 0.4 days (median, 3 days). For all patients without sepsis, the LOS was 7.2 +/- 0.03 days (median, 4 days). In multiple linear regression models, the mean for patients with sepsis syndrome was 18.2 days, which was 11.0 days longer than the mean for all other patients (P < .0001), whereas the mean difference in total charges was $43,000 (both P < .0001). These differences were greater for patients with nosocomial as compared with community-acquired sepsis, although the groups were similar after adjusting for pre-onset LOS. Eight independent correlates of increased post-onset LOS and 12 correlates of total charges were identified. CONCLUSIONS: These data quantify the resource utilization associated with sepsis syndrome, and demonstrate that resource utilization is high in this group. Additional investigation is required to determine how much of the excess post-onset LOS and charges are attributable to sepsis syndrome rather than the underlying medical conditions.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed2003

Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS) score: a prospectively derived and validated clinical prediction rule.

OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were a) to identify univariate correlates of death in emergency department patients at risk for infection; b) to perform multivariate analyses and identify independent predictors of death; and c) to develop and internally validate a prediction rule that may be used in the emergency department to risk stratify patients into different risk groups to predict their mortality rate. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Emergency department of an urban university referral center. PATIENTS: Consecutive emergency department patients, aged 18 or older, who were at risk for infection, as indicated by the emergency department physician ordering a blood culture between February 1, 2000, and February 1, 2001. Of 3,301 eligible patient visits, 3,179 (96%) were enrolled. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was 28-day in-hospital mortality rate. There were 2,070 visits in the derivation set, with 110 deaths (5.3%), and 1,109 visits in the validation set, with 63 deaths (5.7%). Independent multivariate predictors of death were terminal illness (odds ratio, 6.1; 95% confidence interval, 3.6-10.2), tachypnea or hypoxia (2.7, 1.6-4.3), septic shock (2.7, 1.2-5.7), platelet count <150,000 (2.5, 1.5-4.3), band proportion >5% (2.3, 1.5-3.5), age >65 (2.2, 1.3-3.6), lower respiratory infection (1.9, 1.2-3.0), nursing home residence (1.9, 1.2-3.0), and altered mental status (1.6, 1.0-2.6). The clinical prediction rule stratified patients into mortality risk groups of very low, 0.9% (95% confidence interval, 0.2-1.5%); low, 2.0% (0.8-3.2%); moderate, 7.8% (5.6-10%); high, 20% (13-27%); and very high, 50% (36.1-64%) in the derivation set. Mortality rates for the corresponding risk groups in the validation set were 1.1%, 4.4%, 9.3%, 16%, and 39%, respectively. The receiver operating characteristic area for the rule was 0.82 in the derivation set and 0.78 in the validation set. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with suspected infection, this model identifies significant correlates of death and allows stratification of patients according to mortality risk. As new therapies become available for patients with sepsis syndromes, the ability to predict mortality risk may be helpful in triage and treatment decisions.

Age Distribution↗