Eliciting willingness-to-pay to prevent hospital medication administration errors in the UK: a contingent valuation survey.

Medication errors are common in hospitals. These errors can result in adverse drug events (ADEs), which can reduce the health and well-being of patients', and their relatives and caregivers. Interventions have been developed to reduce medication errors, including those that occur at the administration stage. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to elicit willingness-to-pay (WTP) values to prevent hospital medication administration errors. DESIGN AND SETTING: An online, contingent valuation (CV) survey was conducted, using the random card-sort elicitation method, to elicit WTP to prevent medication errors. PARTICIPANTS: A representative sample of the UK public. METHODS: Seven medication error scenarios, varying in the potential for harm and the severity of harm, were valued. Scenarios were developed with input from: clinical experts, focus groups with members of the public and piloting. Mean and median WTP values were calculated, excluding protest responses or those that failed a logic test. A two-part model (logit, generalised linear model) regression analysis was conducted to explore predictive characteristics of WTP. RESULTS: Responses were collected from 1001 individuals. The proportion of respondents willing to pay to prevent a medication error increased as the severity of the ADE increased and was highest for scenarios that described actual harm occurring. Mean WTP across the scenarios ranged from £45 (95% CI £36 to £54) to £278 (95% CI £200 to £355). Several factors influenced both the value and likelihood of WTP, such as: income, known experience of medication errors, sex, field of work, marriage status, education level and employment status. Predictors of WTP were not, however, consistent across scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: This CV study highlights how the UK public value preventing medication errors. The findings from this study could be used to carry out a cost-benefit analysis which could inform implementation decisions on the use of technology to reduce medication administration errors in UK hospitals

Understanding physicians’ behavior toward alerts about nephrotoxic medications in outpatients: a cross-sectional analysis

Background: Although most outpatients are relatively healthy, many have chronic renal insufficiency, and high override rates for suggestions on renal dosing have been observed. To better understand the override of renal dosing alerts in an outpatient setting, we conducted a study to evaluate which patients were more frequently prescribed contraindicated medications, to assess providers’ responses to suggestions, and to examine the drugs involved and the reasons for overrides. Methods: We obtained data on renal alert overrides and the coded reasons for overrides cited by providers at the time of prescription from outpatient clinics and ambulatory hospital-based practices at a large academic health care center over a period of 3 years, from January 2009 to December 2011. For detailed chart review, a group of 6 trained clinicians developed the appropriateness criteria with excellent inter-rater reliability (κ = 0.93). We stratified providers by override frequency and then drew samples from the high- and low-frequency groups. We measured the rate of total overrides, rate of appropriate overrides, medications overridden, and the reason(s) for override. Results: A total of 4120 renal alerts were triggered by 584 prescribers in the study period, among which 78.2% (3,221) were overridden. Almost half of the alerts were triggered by 40 providers and one-third was triggered by high-frequency overriders. The appropriateness rates were fairly similar, at 28.4% and 31.6% for high- and low-frequency overriders, respectively. Metformin, glyburide, hydrochlorothiazide, and nitrofurantoin were the most common drugs overridden. Physicians’ appropriateness rates were higher than the rates for nurse practitioners (32.9% vs. 22.1%). Physicians with low frequency override rates had higher levels of appropriateness for metformin than the high frequency overriders (P = 0.005). Conclusion: A small number of providers accounted for a large fraction of overrides, as was the case with a small number of drugs. These data suggest that a focused intervention targeting primarily these providers and medications has the potential to improve medication safety

On the alert: future priorities for alerts in clinical decision support for computerized physician order entry identified from a European workshop

Background: Clinical decision support (CDS) for electronic prescribing systems (computerized physician order entry) should help prescribers in the safe and rational use of medicines. However, the best ways to alert users to unsafe or irrational prescribing are uncertain. Specifically, CDS systems may generate too many alerts, producing unwelcome distractions for prescribers, or too few alerts running the risk of overlooking possible harms. Obtaining the right balance of alerting to adequately improve patient safety should be a priority. Methods: A workshop funded through the European Regional Development Fund was convened by the University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust to assess current knowledge on alerts in CDS and to reach a consensus on a future research agenda on this topic. Leading European researchers in CDS and alerts in electronic prescribing systems were invited to the workshop. Results: We identified important knowledge gaps and suggest research priorities including (1) the need to determine the optimal sensitivity and specificity of alerts; (2) whether adaptation to the environment or characteristics of the user may improve alerts; and (3) whether modifying the timing and number of alerts will lead to improvements. We have also discussed the challenges and benefits of using naturalistic or experimental studies in the evaluation of alerts and suggested appropriate outcome measures. Conclusions: We have identified critical problems in CDS, which should help to guide priorities in research to evaluate alerts. It is hoped that this will spark the next generation of novel research from which practical steps can be taken to implement changes to CDS systems that will ultimately reduce alert fatigue and improve the design of future systems

Patients’ evaluations of patient safety in English general practices: a cross-sectional study

Background: The frequency and nature of safety problems and harm in general practices has previously relied on information supplied by health professionals, and scarce attention has been paid to experiences of patients. Aim: To examine patient-reported experiences and outcomes of patient safety in Primary Care in England. Design and Setting: Cross-sectional study in 45 general practices. Method: A postal version of the Patient Reported Experiences and Outcomes of Safety in Primary Care (PREOS-PC) questionnaire was sent to a random sample of 6,736 patients. Main outcome measures included “practice activation” (what does the practice do to create a safe environment); “patient activation” (how pro-active are patients in ensuring safe healthcare delivery); “experiences of safety events” (safety errors); “outcomes of safety” (harm); and “overall perception of safety” (how safe do patients rate their practice). Results: 1,244 patients (18.4%) returned completed questionnaires. Scores were high for “practice activation” (mean (standard error) = 80.4 out of 100 (2.0)) and low for “patient activation” (26.3 out of 100 (2.6)). A substantial proportion of patients (45%) reported having experienced at least one safety problem in the previous 12 months, mostly related to appointments (33%), diagnosis (17%), patient-provider communication (15%), and coordination between providers (14%). 221 patients (23%) reported some degree of harm in the previous 12 months. The overall assessment of the level of safety of their practices was generally high (86.0 out of 100 (16.8)). Conclusion: Priority areas for patient safety improvement in general practices in England include appointments, diagnosis, communication, coordination and patient activation

Patient-centered interventions to improve medication management and adherence: A qualitative review of research findings

Patient-centered approaches to improving medication adherence hold promise, but evidence of their effectiveness is unclear. This review reports the current state of scientific research around interventions to improve medication management through four patient-centered domains: shared decision-making, methods to enhance effective prescribing, systems for eliciting and acting on patient feedback about medication use and treatment goals, and medication-taking behavior

Support for Healthcare Professionals After Surgical Patient Safety Incidents: A Qualitative Descriptive Study in 5 Teaching Hospitals

Objective Patient safety incidents can have a profound effect on healthcare professionals, with some experiencing emotional and psychological distress. This study explored the support medical and nonmedical operating room staff received after being involved in a surgical patient safety incident(s) in 5 UK teaching hospitals. Methods An invitation letter and information sheet were e-mailed to all medical and nonmedical operating room staff (N = 927) across the 5 sites. Semistructured interviews were arranged with a range of different healthcare professionals working in operating rooms across a wide variety of surgical specialities. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using an inductive thematic approach. Results We conducted 45 interviews with medical and nonmedical operating room staff, who emphasized the importance of receiving personalized support soon after the incident. Operating room staff described how the first “go to” people were their peers and reported feeling comforted when their peers empathized with their own experience(s). Other participants found it very difficult to seek support, perceiving it as a sign of weakness. Although family members played an important role in supporting second victims, some participants felt unable to discuss the incident with them, fearing that they might not understand. Conclusions There should be clear support structures in place for operating room staff who have been involved in surgical incidents. Health organizations need to offer timely support to frontline staff after these incidents. Senior clinicians should be proactive in offering support to junior colleagues and empathize with their own experiences, thus shifting the competitive culture to one of openness and support