Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

L L Leape

Publications and source records attributed to L L Leape.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed1998

Effect of computerized physician order entry and a team intervention on prevention of serious medication errors.

CONTEXT: Adverse drug events (ADEs) are a significant and costly cause of injury during hospitalization. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of 2 interventions for preventing nonintercepted serious medication errors, defined as those that either resulted in or had potential to result in an ADE and were not intercepted before reaching the patient. DESIGN: Before-after comparison between phase 1 (baseline) and phase 2 (after intervention was implemented) and, within phase 2, a randomized comparison between physician computer order entry (POE) and the combination of POE plus a team intervention. SETTING: Large tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: For the comparison of phase 1 and 2, all patients admitted to a stratified random sample of 6 medical and surgical units in a tertiary care hospital over a 6-month period, and for the randomized comparison during phase 2, all patients admitted to the same units and 2 randomly selected additional units over a subsequent 9-month period. INTERVENTIONS: A physician computer order entry system (POE) for all units and a team-based intervention that included changing the role of pharmacists, implemented for half the units. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Nonintercepted serious medication errors. RESULTS: Comparing identical units between phases 1 and 2, nonintercepted serious medication errors decreased 55%, from 10.7 events per 1000 patient-days to 4.86 events per 1000 (P=.01). The decline occurred for all stages of the medication-use process. Preventable ADEs declined 17% from 4.69 to 3.88 (P=.37), while nonintercepted potential ADEs declined 84% from 5.99 to 0.98 per 1000 patient-days (P=.002). When POE-only was compared with the POE plus team intervention combined, the team intervention conferred no additional benefit over POE. CONCLUSIONS: Physician computer order entry decreased the rate of nonintercepted serious medication errors by more than half, although this decrease was larger for potential ADEs than for errors that actually resulted in an ADE.

Clinical Pharmacy Information Systems↗
PubMed1998

The reproducibility of a method to identify the overuse and underuse of medical procedures.

BACKGROUND: To assess the overuse and underuse of medical procedures, various methods have been developed, but their reproducibility has not been evaluated. This study estimates the reproducibility of one commonly used method. METHODS: We performed a parallel, three-way replication of the RAND-University of California at Los Angeles appropriateness method as applied to two medical procedures, coronary revascularization and hysterectomy. Three nine-member multidisciplinary panels of experts were composed for each procedure by stratified random sampling from a list of experts nominated by the relevant specialty societies. Each panel independently rated the same set of clinical scenarios in terms of the appropriateness of the relevant procedure on a risk-benefit scale ranging from 1 to 9. Final ratings were used to classify the procedure in each scenario as necessary or not necessary (to evaluate underuse) and inappropriate or not inappropriate (to evaluate overuse). Reproducibility was measured by overall agreement and by the kappa statistic. The criteria for underuse and overuse derived from these ratings were then applied to real populations of patients who had undergone coronary revascularization or hysterectomy. RESULTS: The rates of agreement among the three coronary-revascularization panels were 95, 94, and 96 percent for inappropriate-use scenarios and 93, 92, and 92 percent for necessary-use scenarios. Agreement among the three hysterectomy panels was 88, 70, and 74 percent for inappropriate-use scenarios. Scenarios involving necessary use of hysterectomy were not assessed. The three-way kappa statistic to detect overuse was 0.52 for coronary revascularization and 0.51 for hysterectomy. The three-way kappa statistic to detect underuse of coronary revascularization was 0.83. Application of individual panels' criteria to real populations of patients resulted in a 100 percent variation in the proportion of cases classified as inappropriate and a 20 percent variation in the proportion of cases classified as necessary. CONCLUSIONS: The appropriateness method is far from perfect. Appropriateness criteria may be useful in comparing levels of appropriate procedures among populations but should not by themselves be used to direct care for individual patients.

Delphi Technique↗
PubMed1997

Coronary angiography and angioplasty after acute myocardial infarction.

PURPOSE: To assess the data that support the use of coronary angiography and angioplasty after acute myocardial infarction, that identify the risks of these procedures, and that analyze their use and costs. DATA SOURCES: English-language articles published between 1970 and June 1995 identified through a search of the MEDLINE database. STUDY SELECTION: Studies that contained information about benefits, risks, use, and costs of coronary angiography and angioplasty after acute myocardial infarction. DATA EXTRACTION: Descriptive and analytic data from each study were collected. DATA SYNTHESIS: The outcome for patients who have complications of myocardial infarction (such as shock) is poor. Such patients usually undergo angiography, although the evidence that supports this practice is weak. Preliminary data suggest that patients who immediately have angiography and angioplasty after acute myocardial infarction have better outcomes than do patients who receive thrombolytic therapy with angioplasty only for specific indications in experienced centers. After the acute phase of myocardial infarction, patients who have noninvasive evidence of persistent or recurrent ischemia are believed to benefit from angiography. In the remaining patients, however, angiography after myocardial infarction has not been shown to be beneficial. Coronary angiography is done in 30% to 81% of patients after acute myocardial infarction in different settings and regions; for many of these patients, the benefit is questionable. Better outcomes are not always associated with more frequent use of the procedure. In the United States, catheterizations after myocardial infarction cost approximately $1 billion per year. CONCLUSIONS: Although many patients benefit from angiography and angioplasty after myocardial infarction, others probably do not. Substantial resources are at stake.

Angioplasty↗
PubMed1997

Waiting for coronary revascularization: a comparison between New York State, The Netherlands and Sweden.

OBJECTIVE: To compare waiting times for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in New York State, the Netherlands and Sweden and to determine whether queuing adversely affects patients' health. METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of 4487 chronic stable angina patients who underwent PTCA or CABG in one of 15 New York State hospitals (n = 1021) or were referred for PTCA or CABG to one of ten hospitals in the Netherlands (n = 1980) or to one of seven hospitals in Sweden (n = 1486). We measured the median waiting time between coronary angiography and PTCA or CABG. RESULTS: The median waiting time for PTCA in New York was 13 days compared with 35 and 42 days, respectively, in the Netherlands and Sweden (P < 0.001). For CABG, New York patients waited 17 days, while Dutch and Swedish patients waited 72 and 59 days, respectively (P < 0.001). The Swedish and Dutch waiting list mortality rate was 0.8% for CABG candidates and 0.15% for PTCA candidates. CONCLUSIONS: There were large variations in waiting time for coronary revascularization among these three sites. Patients waiting for CABG were at greatest risk of experiencing an adverse event. In both the Netherlands and Sweden, the capacity to perform coronary revascularization has been expanded since this study began. Further international cooperation may identify other areas where quality of care can be improved.

Angina Pectoris↗
PubMed1997

A systems analysis approach to medical error.

Evidence from various sources indicates that a substantial number of hospitalized patients suffer treatment-caused injuries. Most of these injuries result from errors. Yet physicians and other health professionals have been reluctant to admit and address the problem of errors, both because of feelings of guilt and from the desire to avoid punishment or disapproval by colleagues. Research in cognitive psychology and human factors has shown that most errors result from defects in the systems in which we work. These are failures in the design of processes, tasks, training, and conditions of work that make errors more likely. Meaningful reduction of errors requires correction of these systems failures. Barriers to reduction of errors include the complexity of health care systems, difficulties in information access, tolerance of stylistic practices, and fear of punishment that inhibits reporting. Most institutions also lack effective methods for detecting and quantifying errors. Significant improvements in error reduction will require major commitments by organizational leadership and the recognition that errors are evidence of deficiencies in systems, not deficiencies in people.

Data Collection↗
PubMed1997

Preventable adverse drug events in hospitalized patients: a comparative study of intensive care and general care units.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the frequency and preventability of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events in intensive care units (ICUs) and non-ICUs. To evaluate systems factors involving the individual caregivers, care unit teams, and patients involved in each adverse drug event by comparing ICUs with non-ICUs and medical ICUs with surgical ICUs. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. Participants included all 4,031 adult admissions to a stratified, random sample of 11 medical and surgical units in two tertiary care hospitals over a 6-month period. Units included two medical and three surgical ICUs and four medical and two surgical general care units. SETTING: Two tertiary care hospitals: Eleven medical and surgical units, including two medical and three surgical ICUs. PATIENTS: Adult admissions (n = 4,031). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Rate of preventable adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events, length of stay, charges, costs, and measures of the unit's environment. Incidents were detected by stimulated self-report by nurses and pharmacists and by daily review of all charts by nurse investigators. Incidents were subsequently classified by two independent reviewers as to whether they represented adverse drug events or potential adverse drug events and as to severity and preventability. Those individuals involved in the preventable adverse drug event and potential adverse drug event underwent detailed interviews by peer case-investigators. The rate of preventable adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events in ICUs was 19 events per 1000 patient days, nearly twice that rate of non-ICUs (p <.01). The medical ICU rate (25 events per 1000 patient days) was significantly (p <.05) higher than the surgical ICU rate (14 events per 1000 patient days). When adjusted for the number of drugs used in the previous 24 hrs or ordered since admission, there were no differences in rates between ICUs and non-ICUs. ICU acuity, length of stay, and severity of the adverse drug event were greater in ICUs than non-ICUs, but there were no differences between medical ICU and surgical ICU patients. Structured interviews indicated almost no differences between ICUs and non-ICUs for many characteristics of the patient, patient care team, systems, and individual caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of preventable and potential adverse drug events was twice as high in ICUs compared with non-ICUs. However, when adjusted for the number of drugs ordered, there was no greater likelihood for preventable adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events to occur in ICUs than in non-ICUs. Preventable adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events occurred in units that functioned normally and involved caregivers who were working under reasonably normal circumstances, not at the extremes of workload, stress, or a difficult environment.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

What do managed care plans do to affect care? Results from a survey of physicians.

Little is known about physicians' exposure to managed care techniques that affect clinical practice. In 1995, we conducted a survey of 2,003 U.S. physicians asking them about their share of patients subject to a variety of managed care techniques. Nationally, 24% of physicians received some form of capitation payment for their patients. The two most widely used techniques were utilization review (UR), applied to an average of 59% of patients, and discounted fees, applied to an average of 38% of patients. Although UR was common, ultimate denial rates of coverage were very low: at most 3% for the types of care studied. Use of managed care techniques varied more within states than between states. Conventional measures of HMO market penetration revealed little about how managed care affects physicians.

Capitation Fee↗
PubMed1996

The appropriateness of coronary artery bypass graft surgery in academic medical centers. Working Group of the Appropriateness Project of the Academic Medical Center Consortium.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the appropriateness of use of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in Academic Medical Center Consortium hospitals as judged 1) according to criteria developed by an expert panel, 2) according to revisions of those criteria made by cardiac surgeons from the Academic Medical Center Consortium, and 3) by review of cases by the surgeons responsible for those cases. DESIGN: Retrospective, randomized medical record review. SETTING: 12 Academic Medical Center Consortium hospitals. PATIENTS: Random sample of 1156 patients who had had isolated CABG surgery in 1990. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: 1) Percentage of patients with indications for which CABG surgery was classified as appropriate, Inappropriate, or of uncertain appropriateness and 2) percentage of cases in which CABG surgery was judged inappropriate or uncertain for which ratings changed after local case review. RESULTS: Data were retrieved from medical records by trained abstractors using an explicit data collection instrument. Cases in which CABG surgery was judged to be inappropriate or uncertain were individually reviewed by the responsible surgeons. According to the expert panel ratings, 83% of the CABG operations (95% CI, 81% to 85%) were necessary, 9% (CI, 8% to 10%) were appropriate, 7% (CI, 5% to 8%) were uncertain, and 1.6% (CI, 0.6% to 2.5%) were inappropriate. These rates are almost identical to those found in a previous study that was done in New York State and that used the same criteria (in that study, 91% of operations were classified as necessary or appropriate, 7% were classified as uncertain, and 2.4% were classified as inappropriate). Rates of inappropriate procedures varied from 0% to 5% among the 12 member hospitals (P = 0.02). The Academic Medical Center Consortium cardiac surgeons revised 568 (24%) of the indications used by the expert panel. However, because those revisions altered the appropriateness ratings in both directions and affected only 50 cases (4%), the net effect of the revisions was slight: The rate of inappropriate CABG surgery increased from 1.6% to 1.9%. Local review found that data collection errors had caused erroneous ratings in 12.5% of 64 cases in which surgery had been classified as inappropriate or uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: The Academic Medical Center Consortium hospitals had low rates of inappropriate and uncertain use of CABG surgery, regardless of the criteria used for assessment. Even though surgeons from the Consortium revised the appropriateness ratings extensively, their revisions had a negligible effect on the overall assessment of appropriateness. However, because of potential data collection errors, appropriateness criteria should be used for individual case audits only if supplemented by subsequent physician review.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed1996

Variations by specialty in physician ratings of the appropriateness and necessity of indications for procedures.

The authors compare the appropriateness ratings and mutual influence of panelists from different specialties rating a comprehensive set of indications for six surgical procedures. Nine-member panels rated each procedure: abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery, carotid endarterectomy, cataract surgery, coronary angiography, and coronary artery bypass graft surgery/percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (common panel). Panelists individually rated the appropriateness of indications at home and then discussed and re-rated the indications during a 2-day meeting. Subsequently, they rated the necessity of those indications scored by the group as appropriate. There were 45 panelists, including specialists (either performers of the procedure or members of a related specialty) and primary care providers, all drawn from nominations by their respective specialty societies. Main outcome measures included: individual panelists' mean ratings over all indications, mean change and conformity scores between rounds of ratings, and the percentage of audited actual procedures rated appropriate or necessary. Performers had the highest mean ratings, followed by physicians in related specialties, trailed by primary care providers. One fifth of all actual procedures were for indications rated appropriate by performers and less than appropriate by primary care providers. At the panel meetings, primary care providers and related specialists showed no greater tendency to be influenced by other panelists than did performers. Multispecialty panels provide more divergent viewpoints than panels composed entirely of performers. This divergence means that fewer actual procedures are deemed performed for appropriate or necessary indications.

Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary↗
PubMed1995

Systems analysis of adverse drug events. ADE Prevention Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and evaluate the systems failures that underlie errors causing adverse drug events (ADEs) and potential ADEs. DESIGN: Systems analysis of events from a prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: All admissions to 11 medical and surgical units in two tertiary care hospitals over a 6-month period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Errors, proximal causes, and systems failures. METHODS: Errors were detected by interviews of those involved. Errors were classified according to proximal cause and underlying systems failure by multidisciplinary teams of physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and systems analysts. RESULTS: During this period, 334 errors were detected as the causes of 264 preventable ADEs and potential ADEs. Sixteen major systems failures were identified as the underlying causes of the errors. The most common systems failure was in the dissemination of drug knowledge, particularly to physicians, accounting for 29% of the 334 errors. Inadequate availability of patient information, such as the results of laboratory tests, was associated with 18% of errors. Seven systems failures accounted for 78% of the errors; all could be improved by better information systems. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital personnel willingly participated in the detection and investigation of drug use errors and were able to identify underlying systems failures. The most common defects were in systems to disseminate knowledge about drugs and to make drug and patient information readily accessible at the time it is needed. Systems changes to improve dissemination and display of drug and patient data should make errors in the use of drugs less likely.

Boston↗