Implementation, evaluation, and recommendations for extension of AHRQ Common Formats to capture patient- and carepartner-generated safety data

Abstract Objectives The Common Formats, published by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, represent a standard for safety event reporting used by Patient Safety Organizations (PSOs). We evaluated its ability to capture patient-reported safety events. Materials and methods We formally evaluated gaps between the Common Formats and a safety concern reporting system for use by patients and their carepartners (ie friends/families) at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. Results Overall, we found large gaps between Common Formats (versions 1.2, 2.0) and our patient/carepartner reporting system, with only 22–30% of the data elements matching. Discussion We recommend extensions to the Common Formats, including concepts that capture greater detail about the submitter and safety categories relevant to unsafe conditions and near misses that patients and carepartners routinely observe. Conclusion Extensions to the Common Formats could enable more complete safety data sets and greater understanding of safety from key stakeholder perspectives, especially patients, and carepartners. </jats:sec

Mixed-Methods Evaluation of Real-Time Safety Reporting by Hospitalized Patients and Their Care Partners:The MySafeCare Application

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the amount and content of data patients and carepartners reported using a real-time electronic safety tool compared to other reporting mechanisms, and understand their perspectives on safety concerns and reporting in the hospital. METHODS: Mixed-methods study including 20 month pre- and post-implementation trial evaluating MySafeCare, a web-based application which allows hospitalized patients/carepartners to report safety concerns in real-time. Comparison of MySafeCare submission rates for three hospital units (oncology acute care; vascular intermediate care; medical intensive care) to submissions rates of Patient Family Relations (PFR) Department, a hospital service to address patient/family concerns. Triangulation of quantitative data with thematic analysis of safety concern submissions and patient/carepartner interviews to understand submission content and perspectives on safety reporting. RESULTS: Thirty-two MySafeCare submissions were received with an average rate of 1.7 submissions per 1,000 patient-days and a range of 0.3 to 4.8 submissions per 1,000 patient-days across all units, indicating notable variation between units. MySafeCare submission rates were significantly higher than PFR submission rates during the post-intervention period on the vascular unit (4.3 [95% CI 2.8 – 6.5] versus 1.5 [95% CI 0.7 – 3.1], Poisson) (P=0.01). Overall trends indicated a decrease in PFR submissions after MySafeCare implementation. Triangulated data indicated patients preferred to report anonymously and did not want concerns submitted directly to their care team. CONCLUSIONS: MySafeCare evaluation confirmed the potential value of providing an electronic, anonymous reporting tool in the hospital to capture safety concerns in real-time. Such applications should be tested further as part of patient safety programs

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

LINES Ballet BFA at Dominican Spring Dances

Presenting original works by Gregory Dawson, Arturo Fernandez, Julia Stiefel and Tanya Bello. Special encore presentation of select Senior Project works

An informatics research agenda to support patient and family empowerment and engagement in care and recovery during and after hospitalization.

As part of an interdisciplinary acute care patient portal task force with members from 10 academic medical centers and professional organizations, we held a national workshop with 71 attendees representing over 30 health systems, professional organizations, and technology companies. Our consensus approach identified 7 key sociotechnical and evaluation research focus areas related to the consumption and capture of information from patients, care partners (eg, family, friends), and clinicians through portals in the acute and post-acute care settings. The 7 research areas were: (1) standards, (2) privacy and security, (3) user-centered design, (4) implementation, (5) data and content, (6) clinical decision support, and (7) measurement. Patient portals are not yet in routine use in the acute and post-acute setting, and research focused on the identified domains should increase the likelihood that they will deliver benefit, especially as there are differences between needs in acute and post-acute care compared to the ambulatory setting