Ranking Significant Discrepancies in Clinical Reports

Medical errors are a major public health concern and a leading cause of death worldwide. Many healthcare centers and hospitals use reporting systems where medical practitioners write a preliminary medical report and the report is later reviewed, revised, and finalized by a more experienced physician. The revisions range from stylistic to corrections of critical errors or misinterpretations of the case. Due to the large quantity of reports written daily, it is often difficult to manually and thoroughly review all the finalized reports to find such errors and learn from them. To address this challenge, we propose a novel ranking approach, consisting of textual and ontological overlaps between the preliminary and final versions of reports. The approach learns to rank the reports based on the degree of discrepancy between the versions. This allows medical practitioners to easily identify and learn from the reports in which their interpretation most substantially differed from that of the attending physician (who finalized the report). This is a crucial step towards uncovering potential errors and helping medical practitioners to learn from such errors, thus improving patient-care in the long run. We evaluate our model on a dataset of radiology reports and show that our approach outperforms both previously-proposed approaches and more recent language models by 4.5% to 15.4%.Comment: ECIR 2020 (short

A Neural Attention Model for Categorizing Patient Safety Events

Medical errors are leading causes of death in the US and as such, prevention of these errors is paramount to promoting health care. Patient Safety Event reports are narratives describing potential adverse events to the patients and are important in identifying and preventing medical errors. We present a neural network architecture for identifying the type of safety events which is the first step in understanding these narratives. Our proposed model is based on a soft neural attention model to improve the effectiveness of encoding long sequences. Empirical results on two large-scale real-world datasets of patient safety reports demonstrate the effectiveness of our method with significant improvements over existing methods.Comment: ECIR 201

Needlestick and sharps injuries among health care workers at public tertiary hospitals in an urban community in Mongolia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Needlestick and sharps injuries (NSSIs) are one of the major risk factors for blood-borne infections at healthcare facilities. This study examines the current situation of NSSIs among health care workers at public tertiary hospitals in an urban community in Mongolia and explores strategies for the prevention of these injuries.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>A survey of 621 health care workers was undertaken in two public tertiary hospitals in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, in July 2006. A semi-structured and self-administered questionnaire was distributed to study injection practices and the occurrence of NSSIs. A multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate factors associated with experiencing NSSIs. Among the 435 healthcare workers who returned a completed questionnaire, the incidence of NSSIs during the previous 3 months was 38.4%. Health care workers were more likely to report NSSIs if they worked longer than 35 hours per week (odds ratio, OR: 2.47; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.31-4.66) and administered more than 10 injections per day (OR: 4.76; 95% CI: 1.97-11.49). The likelihood of self-reporting NSSIs significantly decreased if health care workers adhered to universal precautions (OR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.17-0.68).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>NSSIs are a common public health problem at public tertiary hospitals in Mongolia. The promotion of adequate working conditions, elimination of excessive injection use, and adherence to universal precautions will be important for the future control of potential infections with blood-borne pathogens due to occupational exposures to sharps in this setting.</p

Cross-sectional survey of a sample of UK primary care dental professionals' experiences of sharps injuries and perception of access to occupational health support

Background: The 2013 Sharps Regulations were introduced to minimise the risk of sharps injuries and blood borne virus transmission throughout healthcare. Occupational health (OH) services are pivotal for helping employers implement these regulations. Despite this, no research has been conducted on the prevalence of sharps injuries, underreporting of injuries or access to OH among primary care dental professionals in the UK since 2013. Aim: To estimate the prevalence of sharps injuries, the level of underreporting and of self-reported access to an OH service both for the care of sharps injuries and for general health and wellbeing. Method: A cross-sectional survey was administered at the 2017 British Dental Association (BDA) Conference and Exhibition in Manchester, and at the 2017 BDA Scottish Conference and Exhibition in Glasgow. The survey covered questions relating to sharps injuries and OH support. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS Version 22 (IBM Corp., 2013). Results: A total of 796 delegates participated, of whom 166 (20.8%) had experienced a sharps injury in the past year and 58 (35%) did not report the incident. Of the participants, 190 (23.9%) reported no, or uncertain, access to OH support. Most respondents' practices had a sharps safety policy (771; 96.9%), but fewer (611; 76.8%) had received training on the prevention of sharps injuries and neither policy nor training were associated with incident reporting. Conclusion: Despite the introduction of the sharps regulations, sharps injuries and underreporting of injuries remain prevalent among those practising in primary dental care. Our results also suggest that there are significant shortfalls in OH support, at a time when changes to guidance on health clearance and management of BBV infected healthcare workers, in addition to sharps injury management, increase the need for such services

Predictors and outcomes of patient safety culture in hospitals

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Developing a patient safety culture was one of the recommendations made by the Institute of Medicine to assist hospitals in improving patient safety. In recent years, a multitude of evidence, mostly originating from developed countries, has been published on patient safety culture. One of the first efforts to assess the culture of safety in the Eastern Mediterranean Region was by El-Jardali et al. (2010) in Lebanon. The study entitled "The Current State of Patient Safety Culture: a study at baseline" assessed the culture of safety in Lebanese hospitals. Based on study findings, the objective of this paper is to explore the association between patient safety culture predictors and outcomes, taking into consideration respondent and hospital characteristics. In addition, it will examine the correlation between patient safety culture composites.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Sixty-eight hospitals and 6,807 respondents participated in the study. The study which adopted a cross sectional research design utilized an Arabic-translated version of the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC). The HSOPSC measures 12 patient safety composites. Two of the composites, in addition to a patient safety grade and the number of events reported, represented the four outcome variables. Bivariate and mixed model regression analyses were used to examine the association between the patient safety culture predictors and outcomes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Significant correlations were observed among all patient safety culture composites but with differences in the strength of the correlation. Generalized Estimating Equations for the patient safety composite scores and respondent and hospital characteristics against the patient safety grade and the number of events reported revealed significant correlations. Significant correlations were also observed by linear mixed models of the same variables against the frequency of events reported and the overall perception of safety.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Event reporting, communication, patient safety leadership and management, staffing, and accreditation were identified as major patient safety culture predictors. Investing in practices that tackle these issues and prioritizing patient safety is essential in Lebanese hospitals in order to improve patient safety. In addition, further research is needed to understand the association between patient safety culture and clinical outcomes.</p