Browsing by Subject "Medical Errors"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    A survey-based study of wrong-level lumbar spine surgery: the scope of the problem and current practices in place to help avoid these errors.
    (World neurosurgery, 2013-03) Groff, Michael W; Heller, Joshua E; Potts, Eric A; Mummaneni, Praveen V; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Smith, Justin S

    Objective

    To understand better the scope of wrong-level lumbar spine surgery and current practices in place to help avoid such errors.

    Methods

    The Joint Section on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves (Spine Section) developed a survey on single-level lumbar spine decompression surgery. Invitations to complete the Web-based survey were sent to all Spine Section members. Respondents were assured of confidentiality.

    Results

    There were 569 responses from 1045 requests (54%). Most surgeons either routinely (74%) or sometimes (11%) obtain preoperative imaging for incision planning. Most surgeons indicated that they obtained imaging after the incision was performed for localization either routinely before bone removal (73%) or most frequently before bone removal but occasionally after (16%). Almost 50% of reporting surgeons have performed wrong-level lumbar spine surgery at least once, and >10% have performed wrong-side lumbar spine surgery at least once. Nearly 20% of responding surgeons have been the subject of at least one malpractice case relating to these errors. Only 40% of respondents believed that the site marking/"time out" protocol of The Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations has led to a reduction in these errors.

    Conclusions

    There is substantial heterogeneity in approaches used to localize operative levels in the lumbar spine. Existing safety protocols may not be mitigating wrong-level surgery to the extent previously thought.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Statewide Longitudinal Progression of the Whole-Patient Measure of Safety in South Carolina.
    (Journal for healthcare quality : official publication of the National Association for Healthcare Quality, 2018-09) Turley, Christine B; Brittingham, Jordan; Moonan, Aunyika; Davis, Dianne; Chakraborty, Hrishikesh
    Meaningful improvement in patient safety encompasses a vast number of quality metrics, but a single measure to represent the overall level of safety is challenging to produce. Recently, Perla et al. established the Whole-Person Measure of Safety (WPMoS) to reflect the concept of global risk assessment at the patient level. We evaluated the WPMoS across an entire state to understand the impact of urban/rural setting, academic status, and hospital size on patient safety outcomes. The population included all South Carolina (SC) inpatient discharges from January 1, 2008, through to December 31, 2013, and was evaluated using established definitions of highly undesirable events (HUEs). Over the study period, the proportion of hospital discharges with at least one HUE significantly decreased from 9.7% to 8.8%, including significant reductions in nine of the 14 HUEs. Academic, large, and urban hospitals had a significantly lower proportion of hospital discharges with at least one HUE in 2008, but only urban hospitals remained significantly lower by 2013. Results indicate that there has been a decrease in harm events captured through administrative coded data over this 6-year period. A composite measure, such as the WPMoS, is necessary for hospitals to evaluate their progress toward reducing preventable harm.