An NTSB for Health Care - Learning From Innovation: Debate and Innovate or Capitulate
Texas Medical Institute of Technology, Austin, Texas 78722, USA. Journal of Patient Safety
(Impact Factor: 1.49).
03/2012; 8(1):3-14. DOI: 10.1097/PTS.0b013e3182446c51
Economic and medical risks threaten the national security of America. The spiraling costs of United States' avoidable healthcare harm and waste far exceed those of any other nation. This 2-part paper, written by a group of aviators, is a national call to action to adopt readily available and transferable safety innovations we have already paid for that have made the airline industry one of the safest in the world. This first part supports the debate for a National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for health care, and the second supports more cross-over adoption by hospitals of methods pioneered in aviation.
A review of aviation and healthcare leadership best practices and technologies was undertaken through literature review, reporting body research, and interviews of experts in the field of aviation principles applied to medicine. An aviation cross-over inventory and consensus process led to a call for action to address the current crisis of healthcare waste and harm.
The NTSB, an independent agency established by the United States Congress, was developed to investigate all significant transportation accidents to prevent recurrence. Certain NTSB publications known as "Blue Cover Reports" used by pilots and airlines to drive safety provide a model that could be emulated for hospital accidents.
An NTSB-type organization for health care could greatly improve healthcare safety at low cost and great benefit. A "Red Cover Report" for health care could save lives, save money, and bring value to communities. A call to action is made in this first paper to debate this opportunity for an NTSB for health care. A second follow-on paper is a call to action of healthcare suppliers, providers, and purchasers to reinvigorate their adoption of aviation best practices as the market transitions from a fragmented provider-volume-centered to an integrated patient-value-centered world.
Available from: Jesse Pines
Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety / Joint Commission Resources 11/2012; 38(11):516-26.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To evaluate the effectiveness of a hospital-wide initiative to improve patient safety by implementing high-reliability practices as part of a quality improvement (QI) program aimed at reducing all preventable harm.
A hospital wide quasi-experimental time series QI initiative using high-reliability concepts, microsystem-based multidisciplinary teams, and QI science tools to reduce hospital acquired harm was implemented. Extensive error prevention training was provided for all employees. Change concepts were enacted using the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Model for Improvement. Compliance with change packages was measured.
Between 2010 and 2012, the serious safety event rate decreased from 1.15 events to 0.19 event per 10 000 adjusted hospital-days, an 83.3% reduction (P < .001). Preventable harm events decreased by 53%, from a quarterly peak of 150 in the first quarter of 2010 to 71 in the fourth quarter of 2012 (P < .01). Observed hospital mortality decreased from 1.0% to 0.75% (P < .001), although severity-adjusted expected mortality actually increased slightly, and estimated harm-related hospital costs decreased by 22.0%. Hospital-wide safety climate scores increased significantly.
Substantial reductions in serious safety event rate, preventable harm, hospital mortality, and cost were seen after implementation of our multifaceted approach. Measurable improvements in the safety culture were noted as well.
The Journal of pediatrics 07/2013; 163(6). DOI:10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.06.031 · 3.79 Impact Factor
Biomedical Instrumentation & Technology 08/2013; 47(s2):64-67. DOI:10.2345/0899-8205-47.s2.64
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.