Article

What happens between visits? Adverse and potential adverse events among a low-income, urban, ambulatory population with diabetes.

Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, Center for Vulnerable Populations, San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, California 94143-1364, USA.
Quality and Safety in Health Care (Impact Factor: 2.16). 04/2010; 19(3):223-8. DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2008.029116
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Little is known about adverse events (AEs) that occur between physician visits for ambulatory chronic disease patients. An automated telephone self-management support programme for a diverse population of diabetes patients was implemented to capture AEs, describe the self-management domains from which they emanate and explore contributing causes.
AEs and potential AEs (PotAEs) were identified among 111 ethnically diverse diabetes patients. An AE is an injury that results from either medical management or patient self-management; a PotAE is an unsafe state likely to lead to an event if it persists without intervention. Medical record reviews were conducted to ascertain which self-management domain was involved with the event and to explore contributing causes.
Among the 111 patients, 86% had at least one event detected over the 9-month observation period. 111 AEs and 153 PotAEs were identified. For all events, medication management was the most common domain (166 events, 63%). Only 20% of events reflected a single contributing cause; in the remaining 80%, a combination of system, clinician and patient factors contributed to their occurrence. Patient actions were implicated in 205 (77%) events, systems issues in 183 (69%) events and inadequate physician-patient communication in 155 (59%) events. Aside from communication, primary care clinician actions contributed to the occurrence of the event in only 16 cases (6%).
Our findings reveal a complex safety ecology, with multiple contributing causes for AEs and PotAEs among ambulatory diabetes patients. Moreover, patients themselves seem to be key drivers of safety and of AEs, suggesting that patient-level self-management support and patient-centred communication are critical to AE prevention.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
107 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To analyse the frequency of mistakes in communication between the physician and the patient and their incidence in errors in self-administered drugs. METHODS: We undertook a descriptive, cross-sectional study based on interviews with a random sample of patients older than 65 years who were polymedicated (five or more drugs) and had multiple comorbidities. Data were analysed about the patients' reports of what the physician said, medication mistakes by the patients and their consequences. RESULTS: Responses were provided by 382 patients. A medication error in the last year was reported by 287 patients (75%), and 16 patients (4%) reported four or more errors. Most cases concerned the dosage, a similar appearance of the medication or a lack of understanding of the physician's instructions. Very severe consequences occurred in 19 cases (5%). Multiple comorbidities (P = 0.006) and a greater number of treatments (P = 0.002) were associated with making mistakes. Frequent changes in prescription (P = 0.02), not considering the prescriptions of other physicians (P = 0.01), inconsistency in the messages (P = 0.01), being treated by various different physicians at the same time (P = 0.03), a feeling of not being listened to (P < 0.001) or loss of trust in the physician (P < 0.001) were associated with making medication mistakes. CONCLUSIONS: Mistakes by polymedicated patients with multiple comorbidities represent a real risk that should be addressed by the professionals. A review should be made of the routine control questions that the physician asks the patient to identify what other drugs the patient may be taking that have been indicated by another physician.
    Family Practice 08/2012; · 1.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nonadherence and medication errors are common among patients with complex drug regimens. Apps for smartphones and tablets are effective for improving adherence, but they have not been tested in elderly patients with complex chronic conditions and who typically have less experience with this type of technology. The objective of this study was to design, implement, and evaluate a medication self-management app (called ALICE) for elderly patients taking multiple medications with the intention of improving adherence and safe medication use. A single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted with a control and an experimental group (N=99) in Spain in 2013. The characteristics of ALICE were specified based on the suggestions of 3 nominal groups with a total of 23 patients and a focus group with 7 professionals. ALICE was designed for Android and iOS to allow for the personalization of prescriptions and medical advice, showing images of each of the medications (the packaging and the medication itself) together with alerts and multiple reminders for each alert. The randomly assigned patients in the control group received oral and written information on the safe use of their medications and the patients in the experimental group used ALICE for 3 months. Pre and post measures included rate of missed doses and medication errors reported by patients, scores from the 4-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-4), level of independence, self-perceived health status, and biochemical test results. In the experimental group, data were collected on their previous experience with information and communication technologies, their rating of ALICE, and their perception of the level of independence they had achieved. The intergroup intervention effects were calculated by univariate linear models and ANOVA, with the pre to post intervention differences as the dependent variables. Data were obtained from 99 patients (48 and 51 in the control and experimental groups, respectively). Patients in the experimental group obtained better MMAS-4 scores (P<.001) and reported fewer missed doses of medication (P=.02). ALICE only helped to significantly reduce medication errors in patients with an initially higher rate of errors (P<.001). Patients with no experience with information and communication technologies reported better adherence (P<.001), fewer missed doses (P<.001), and fewer medication errors (P=.02). The mean satisfaction score for ALICE was 8.5 out of 10. In all, 45 of 51 patients (88%) felt that ALICE improved their independence in managing their medications. The ALICE app improves adherence, helps reduce rates of forgetting and of medication errors, and increases perceived independence in managing medication. Elderly patients with no previous experience with information and communication technologies are capable of effectively using an app designed to help them take their medicine more safely. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02071498; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02071498 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6OJjdHVhD).
    Journal of Medical Internet Research 01/2014; 16(4):e99. · 4.67 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Interactive health information technology (HIT) can support the complex self-management tasks for diabetes. However, less is known about between-visit interactions and patient safety among chronic illness patients treated in the outpatient setting. We classified 13 categories for safety events and potential safety events within a larger trial evaluating a multilingual automated telephone self-management support system for diabetes using interactive voice response. Participants could trigger safety concerns by reporting hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia, inability to obtain medications, medication nonadherence and side effects, and needing appointments and/or supplies. We then examined these triggers across patient demographic and health characteristics to determine which patients were most likely to experience safety events. Overall, there were 360 safety triggers that occurred among 155 participants, which represented 53% of individuals and 7.6% of all automated calls over the 27-week intervention. The most common triggers were for pain or medication side effects (22%) and not checking blood sugars (13%). In adjusted models, race/ethnicity and language were related to safety triggers; Spanish-speaking participants were significantly (p = .02) more likely than English-speaking participants to experience a safety trigger, and black participants were marginally more likely (p = .09) than white participants to experience a safety trigger. About half of patients enrolled in a self-management technology intervention triggered at least one potential safety event over the course of the trial, and this was more frequent among some patients. Systems implementing HIT strategies to improve self-care and remote monitoring should consider specific program design elements to address these potential safety events.
    Journal of diabetes science and technology 05/2013; 7(3):596-601.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
7 Downloads
Available from
Jul 25, 2014