The Experts below are selected from a list of 200895 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Christopher P Landrigan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
performance of the global assessment of Pediatric Patient safety gapps tool
Pediatrics, 2016Co-Authors: Christopher P Landrigan, David C Stockwell, Sara L Toomey, Samuel S Loren, Michaela Tracy, Jisun JangAbstract:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Efforts to advance Patient safety have been hampered by the lack of high quality measures of adverse events (AEs). This study9s objective was to develop and test the Global Assessment of Pediatric Patient Safety (GAPPS) trigger tool, which measures hospital-wide rates of AEs and preventable AEs. METHODS: Through a literature review and expert panel process, we developed a draft trigger tool. Tool performance was tested in 16 academic and community hospitals across the United States. At each site, a primary reviewer (nurse) reviewed ∼240 randomly selected medical records; 10% of records underwent an additional primary review. Suspected AEs were subsequently evaluated by 2 secondary reviewers (physicians). Ten percent of records were also reviewed by external expert reviewers. Each trigger9s incidence and positivity rates were assessed to refine GAPPS. RESULTS: In total, 3814 medical records were reviewed. Primary reviewers agreed 92% of the time on presence or absence of a suspected AE (κ = 0.69). Secondary reviewers verifying AE presence or absence agreed 92% of the time (κ = 0.81). Using expert reviews as a standard for comparison, hospital-based primary reviewers had a sensitivity and specificity of 40% and 91%, respectively. As primary reviewers gained experience, their agreement with expert reviewers improved significantly. After removing low-yield triggers, 27 and 30 (of 54) triggers met inclusion criteria to form final manual and automated trigger lists, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: GAPPS reliably identifies AEs and can be used to guide and monitor quality improvement efforts. Ongoing refinement may facilitate future interhospital comparisons.
Chunliu Zhan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Pediatric Patient safety in hospitals a national picture in 2000
Pediatrics, 2004Co-Authors: Marlene R Miller, Chunliu ZhanAbstract:Objective. To describe potential Patient safety events for hospitalized children, examine associated factors, and explore impacts of safety events. Methods. The newly released Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs), developed by researchers at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to identify potential in-hospital Patient safety problems using administrative data, were applied to hospital discharge data. All 5.7 million discharge records for children younger than 19 years from 27 states in the 2000 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project were analyzed for PSI events. Prevalence of PSI events and associations with Patient-level and hospital-level characteristics were examined. Multivariate regression adjusting for Patient severity of illness was used to estimate impacts of safety events in terms of excess length of stay, charges, and in-hospital mortality. Results. The prevalence of Pediatric Patient safety events is significant. PSI events occurred more frequently in the very young and those on Medicaid insurance, some of the most vulnerable hospitalized children. Regression analysis found that almost all PSIs are associated with significant and substantial increases in length of stay, charges, and in-hospital death. Using the estimates derived here and the actual number of cases identified in the 2000 data, we estimate that Patient safety events incurred >$1 billion in excess charges for children alone in 2000. Conclusions. Patient safety problems for hospitalized children occur frequently and with substantial impacts to our health care industry. Unmeasurable by this study are the additional “costs” and “burdens” of safety events that our Patients are forced to handle. Additional work to describe and quantify better these outcomes in addition to ones measured here can help solidify the “business case” for Patient safety efforts.
Deborah V Gibson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
eliciting the child s voice in adverse event reporting in oncology trials cognitive interview findings from the Pediatric Patient reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events initiative
Pediatric Blood & Cancer, 2017Co-Authors: Bryce B Reeve, Molly Mcfatrich, Laura C Pinheiro, Meaghann S Weaver, Lillian Sung, Janice S Withycombe, Justin N Baker, Jennifer W Mack, Mia K Waldron, Deborah V GibsonAbstract:Background Adverse event (AE) reporting in oncology trials is required, but current practice does not directly integrate the child's voice. The Pediatric Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) is being developed to assess symptomatic AEs via child/adolescent self-report or proxy-report. This qualitative study evaluates the child's/adolescent's understanding and ability to provide valid responses to the PRO-CTCAE to inform questionnaire refinements and confirm content validity. Procedure From seven Pediatric research hospitals, children/adolescents ages 7–15 years who were diagnosed with cancer and receiving treatment were eligible, along with their parent-proxies. The Pediatric PRO-CTCAE includes 130 questions that assess 62 symptomatic AEs capturing symptom frequency, severity, interference, or presence. Cognitive interviews with retrospective probing were completed with children in the age groups of 7–8, 9–12, and 13–15 years. The children/adolescents and proxies were interviewed independently. Results Two rounds of interviews involved 81 children and adolescents and 74 parent-proxies. Fifteen of the 62 AE terms were revised after Round 1, including refinements to the questions assessing symptom severity. Most participants rated the PRO-CTCAE AE items as “very easy” or “somewhat easy” and were able to read, understand, and provide valid responses to questions. A few AE items assessing rare events were challenging to understand. Conclusions The Pediatric and Proxy PRO-CTCAE performed well among children and adolescents and their proxies, supporting its content validity. Data from PRO-CTCAE may improve symptomatic AE reporting in clinical trials and enhance the quality of care that children receive.
Marlene R Miller - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Pediatric Patient safety in hospitals a national picture in 2000
Pediatrics, 2004Co-Authors: Marlene R Miller, Chunliu ZhanAbstract:Objective. To describe potential Patient safety events for hospitalized children, examine associated factors, and explore impacts of safety events. Methods. The newly released Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs), developed by researchers at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to identify potential in-hospital Patient safety problems using administrative data, were applied to hospital discharge data. All 5.7 million discharge records for children younger than 19 years from 27 states in the 2000 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project were analyzed for PSI events. Prevalence of PSI events and associations with Patient-level and hospital-level characteristics were examined. Multivariate regression adjusting for Patient severity of illness was used to estimate impacts of safety events in terms of excess length of stay, charges, and in-hospital mortality. Results. The prevalence of Pediatric Patient safety events is significant. PSI events occurred more frequently in the very young and those on Medicaid insurance, some of the most vulnerable hospitalized children. Regression analysis found that almost all PSIs are associated with significant and substantial increases in length of stay, charges, and in-hospital death. Using the estimates derived here and the actual number of cases identified in the 2000 data, we estimate that Patient safety events incurred >$1 billion in excess charges for children alone in 2000. Conclusions. Patient safety problems for hospitalized children occur frequently and with substantial impacts to our health care industry. Unmeasurable by this study are the additional “costs” and “burdens” of safety events that our Patients are forced to handle. Additional work to describe and quantify better these outcomes in addition to ones measured here can help solidify the “business case” for Patient safety efforts.
Bryce B Reeve - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
eliciting the child s voice in adverse event reporting in oncology trials cognitive interview findings from the Pediatric Patient reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events initiative
Pediatric Blood & Cancer, 2017Co-Authors: Bryce B Reeve, Molly Mcfatrich, Laura C Pinheiro, Meaghann S Weaver, Lillian Sung, Janice S Withycombe, Justin N Baker, Jennifer W Mack, Mia K Waldron, Deborah V GibsonAbstract:Background Adverse event (AE) reporting in oncology trials is required, but current practice does not directly integrate the child's voice. The Pediatric Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) is being developed to assess symptomatic AEs via child/adolescent self-report or proxy-report. This qualitative study evaluates the child's/adolescent's understanding and ability to provide valid responses to the PRO-CTCAE to inform questionnaire refinements and confirm content validity. Procedure From seven Pediatric research hospitals, children/adolescents ages 7–15 years who were diagnosed with cancer and receiving treatment were eligible, along with their parent-proxies. The Pediatric PRO-CTCAE includes 130 questions that assess 62 symptomatic AEs capturing symptom frequency, severity, interference, or presence. Cognitive interviews with retrospective probing were completed with children in the age groups of 7–8, 9–12, and 13–15 years. The children/adolescents and proxies were interviewed independently. Results Two rounds of interviews involved 81 children and adolescents and 74 parent-proxies. Fifteen of the 62 AE terms were revised after Round 1, including refinements to the questions assessing symptom severity. Most participants rated the PRO-CTCAE AE items as “very easy” or “somewhat easy” and were able to read, understand, and provide valid responses to questions. A few AE items assessing rare events were challenging to understand. Conclusions The Pediatric and Proxy PRO-CTCAE performed well among children and adolescents and their proxies, supporting its content validity. Data from PRO-CTCAE may improve symptomatic AE reporting in clinical trials and enhance the quality of care that children receive.
