Cifra Christina L, Bembea Melania M, Fackler James C, Miller Marlene R
1Department of Pediatrics, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA. 2Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. 3Department of Pediatrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2016 Jan;17(1):58-66. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000000539.
Determine the effectiveness of a structured systems-oriented morbidity and mortality conference in improving the process of reviewing and responding to adverse events in a PICU.
Prospective time series analysis before and after implementation of a systems-oriented morbidity and mortality conference.
Single tertiary referral PICU in Baltimore, MD.
Thirty-three patients discussed before and 31 patients after implementation of a systems-oriented morbidity and mortality conference over a total of 20 morbidity and mortality conferences, from April 2013 to March 2014.
Systems-oriented morbidity and mortality conference incorporating elements of medical incident analysis.
There was a significant increase in meeting attendance (mean, 12 vs 31 attendees per morbidity and mortality conference; p < 0.001) after the systems-oriented morbidity and mortality conference was instituted. There was no significant difference in the mean number of cases suggested (4.2 vs 4.6) or discussed (3.3 vs 3.1) per morbidity and mortality conference. There was also no significant difference in the mean number of adverse events identified per morbidity and mortality conference (3.4 vs 4.3). However, there was an increase in the proportion of cases discussed using a standard case review tool, but this did not reach statistical significance (27% vs 45%; p = 0.231). Nevertheless, we observed a significant increase in the mean number of quality improvement interventions suggested (2.4 vs 5.6; p < 0.001) and implemented (1.7 vs 4.4; p < 0.001) per morbidity and mortality conference. All adverse event categories identified had corresponding interventions suggested after the systems-oriented morbidity and mortality conference was instituted compared with before (80% vs 100%). Intervention-to-adverse event ratios per category were also higher (mean, 0.6 vs 1.5).
A structured systems-oriented PICU morbidity and mortality conference incorporating elements of medical incident analysis improves the process of reviewing and responding to adverse events by significantly increasing quality improvement interventions suggested and implemented. Future work would involve testing locally adapted versions of the systems-oriented morbidity and mortality conference in multiple inpatient settings.
确定以系统为导向的结构化发病率和死亡率会议在改善儿科重症监护病房(PICU)不良事件审查和应对流程方面的有效性。
实施以系统为导向的发病率和死亡率会议前后的前瞻性时间序列分析。
马里兰州巴尔的摩的一家单一三级转诊PICU。
在2013年4月至2014年3月期间总共20次发病率和死亡率会议中,实施以系统为导向的发病率和死亡率会议之前讨论了33例患者,之后讨论了31例患者。
包含医疗事件分析要素的以系统为导向的发病率和死亡率会议。
实施以系统为导向的发病率和死亡率会议后,会议出席人数显著增加(每次发病率和死亡率会议的平均出席人数:之前为12人,之后为31人;p < 0.001)。每次发病率和死亡率会议建议(4.2对4.6)或讨论(3.3对3.1)的平均病例数无显著差异。每次发病率和死亡率会议确定的平均不良事件数也无显著差异(3.4对4.3)。然而,使用标准病例审查工具讨论的病例比例有所增加,但未达到统计学意义(27%对45%;p = 0.231)。尽管如此,我们观察到每次发病率和死亡率会议建议(2.4对5.6;p < 0.001)和实施(1.7对4.4;p < 0.001)的质量改进干预措施平均数量显著增加。与之前相比,实施以系统为导向的发病率和死亡率会议后,所有确定的不良事件类别都有相应的干预措施建议(80%对100%)。每个类别的干预与不良事件比率也更高(平均,0.6对1.5)。
包含医疗事件分析要素的以系统为导向的结构化PICU发病率和死亡率会议通过显著增加建议和实施的质量改进干预措施,改善了不良事件的审查和应对流程。未来的工作将包括在多个住院环境中测试本地化的以系统为导向的发病率和死亡率会议版本。