Prescription drug monitoring programs evaluation: A systematic review of reviews.

BACKGROUND: Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are used to mitigate harms from high-risk medicines including misuse, prescription shopping, overdoses, and death. Previous systematic reviews report inconsistent findings. We undertook a systematic review of reviews to 1) describe and identify the methods and outcome measures used to evaluate PDMPs, 2) summarise existing evidence on outcomes and factors that influence PDMP success or benefit realisation. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and PROSPERO were used to identify systematic reviews on PDMPs. Twelve papers met the inclusion criteria. Data extracted included review aim, study designs, settings, outcome measures, and key findings. Quality was assessed using AMSTAR 2 quality assessment tool. RESULTS: Review papers were categorised as outcome or process evaluation reviews. Process evaluation reviews described implementation processes, barriers and facilitators to PDMP use and/or implementation. Most (57%) papers described barriers which frequently included usability and data integration. Outcome evaluation papers reported impact of PDMPs on outcomes, which were opioid-focused, and findings were highly variable. Most reviews (67%) were rated as low quality, limiting the conclusions that can be drawn. CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistent methods and outcome measures were used to evaluate PDMPs. No economic evaluations of PDMPs were found. Standardising assessment and reporting of results may improve the quality and confidence in an evidence-base to inform future roll-out and evaluation of PDMPs. Targeting barriers such as system-related challenges and negative end-user perceptions could improve sustained uptake of PDMPs, and potentially facilitate benefits realisation, including mitigating harms of high-risk prescription medicines

Revisiting mortality deceleration patterns in a gamma-Gompertz-Makeham framework

We calculate life-table aging rates (LARs) for overall mortality by estimating a gamma-Gompertz-Makeham (G GM) model and taking advantage of LAR’s parametric representation by Vaupel and Zhang [34]. For selected HMD countries, we study how the evolution of estimated LAR patterns could explain observed 1) longevity dynamics, and 2) mortality improvement or deterioration at different ages. Surprisingly, the age of mortality deceleration x showed almost no correlation with a number of longevity measures apart from e0. In addition, as mortality concentrates at older ages with time, its characteristic bell-shaped pattern becomes more pronounced. Moreover, in a GGM framework, we identify the impact of senescent mortality on shape of the rate of population aging. We also find evidence for a strong relationship between x and the statistically significant curvilinear changes in the evolution of e0 over time. Finally, model-based LARs appear to be consistent with point b) of the “heterogeneity hypothesis” [12]: mortality deceleration, due to selection effects, should shift to older ages as the level of total adult mortality declines

Use of digital patient decision-support tools for atrial fibrillation treatments: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of digital patient decision-support tools for atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment decisions in adults with AF. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated digital patient decision-support tools for AF treatment decisions in adults with AF. INFORMATION SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus from 2005 to 2023.Risk-of-bias (RoB) assessment: We assessed RoB using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 for RCTs and cluster RCT and the ROBINS-I tool for quasi-experimental studies. SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: We used random effects meta-analysis to synthesise decisional conflict and patient knowledge outcomes reported in RCTs. We performed narrative synthesis for all outcomes. The main outcomes of interest were decisional conflict and patient knowledge. RESULTS: 13 articles, reporting on 11 studies (4 RCTs, 1 cluster RCT and 6 quasi-experimental) met the inclusion criteria. There were 2714 participants across all studies (2372 in RCTs), of which 26% were women and the mean age was 71 years. Socioeconomically disadvantaged groups were poorly represented in the included studies. Seven studies (n=2508) focused on non-valvular AF and the mean CHAD2DS2-VASc across studies was 3.2 and for HAS-BLED 1.9. All tools focused on decisions regarding thromboembolic stroke prevention and most enabled calculation of individualised stroke risk. Tools were heterogeneous in features and functions; four tools were patient decision aids. The readability of content was reported in one study. Meta-analyses showed a reduction in decisional conflict (4 RCTs (n=2167); standardised mean difference -0.19; 95% CI -0.30 to -0.08; p=0.001; I2=26.5%; moderate certainty evidence) corresponding to a decrease in 12.4 units on a scale of 0 to 100 (95% CI -19.5 to -5.2) and improvement in patient knowledge (2 RCTs (n=1057); risk difference 0.72, 95% CI 0.68, 0.76, p<0.001; I2=0%; low certainty evidence) favouring digital patient decision-support tools compared with usual care. Four of the 11 tools were publicly available and 3 had been implemented in healthcare delivery. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of stroke prevention in AF, digital patient decision-support tools likely reduce decisional conflict and may result in little to no change in patient knowledge, compared with usual care. Future studies should leverage digital capabilities for increased personalisation and interactivity of the tools, with better consideration of health literacy and equity aspects. Additional robust trials and implementation studies are warranted. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020218025

A review of significant events analysed in general practice: implications for the quality and safety of patient care

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Significant event analysis (SEA) is promoted as a team-based approach to enhancing patient safety through reflective learning. Evidence of SEA participation is required for appraisal and contractual purposes in UK general practice. A voluntary educational model in the west of Scotland enables general practitioners (GPs) and doctors-in-training to submit SEA reports for feedback from trained peers. We reviewed reports to identify the range of safety issues analysed, learning needs raised and actions taken by GP teams.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>Content analysis of SEA reports submitted in an 18 month period between 2005 and 2007.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>191 SEA reports were reviewed. 48 described patient harm (25.1%). A further 109 reports (57.1%) outlined circumstances that had the potential to cause patient harm. Individual 'error' was cited as the most common reason for event occurrence (32.5%). Learning opportunities were identified in 182 reports (95.3%) but were often non-specific professional issues not shared with the wider practice team. 154 SEA reports (80.1%) described actions taken to improve practice systems or professional behaviour. However, non-medical staff were less likely to be involved in the changes resulting from event analyses describing patient harm (p < 0.05)</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The study provides some evidence of the potential of SEA to improve healthcare quality and safety. If applied rigorously, GP teams and doctors in training can use the technique to investigate and learn from a wide variety of quality issues including those resulting in patient harm. This leads to reported change but it is unclear if such improvement is sustained.</p

Delivering safe and effective test-result communication, management and follow-up : a mixed-methods study protocol

Introduction: The failure to follow-up pathology and medical imaging test results poses patient-safety risks which threaten the effectiveness, quality and safety of patient care. The objective of this project is to: (1) improve the effectiveness and safety of test-result management through the establishment of clear governance processes of communication, responsibility and accountability; (2) harness health information technology (IT) to inform and monitor test-result management; (3) enhance the contribution of consumers to the establishment of safe and effective test-result management systems. Methods and analysis: This convergent mixed-methods project triangulates three multistage studies at seven adult hospitals and one paediatric hospital in Australia. Study 1 adopts qualitative research approaches including semistructured interviews, focus groups and ethnographic observations to gain a better understanding of test-result communication and management practices in hospitals, and to identify patient-safety risks which require quality-improvement interventions. Study 2 analyses linked sets of routinely collected healthcare data to examine critical test-result thresholds and test-result notification processes. A controlled before-and-after study across three emergency departments will measure the impact of interventions (including the use of IT) developed to improve the safety and quality of test-result communication and management processes. Study 3 adopts a consumer-driven approach, including semistructured interviews, and the convening of consumer-reference groups and community forums. The qualitative data will identify mechanisms to enhance the role of consumers in test-management governance processes, and inform the direction of the research and the interpretation of findings. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval has been granted by the South Eastern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee and Macquarie University. Findings will be disseminated in academic, industry and consumer journals, newsletters and conferences

Patient safety culture measurement in general practice. Clinimetric properties of 'SCOPE'

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A supportive patient safety culture is considered to be an essential condition for improving patient safety. Assessing the current safety culture in general practice may be a first step to target improvements. To that end, we studied internal consistency and construct validity of a safety culture questionnaire for general practice (SCOPE) which was derived from a comparable questionnaire for hospitals (Dutch-HSOPS).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The survey was conducted among caregivers of Dutch general practice as part of an ongoing quality accreditation process using a 46 item questionnaire. We conducted factor analyses and studied validity by calculating correlations between the subscales and testing the hypothesis that respondents' <it>patient safety grade </it>of their practices correlated with their scores on the questionnaire.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 72 practices 294 respondents completed the questionnaire. Eight factors were identified concerning <it>handover and teamwork, support and fellowship, communication openness, feedback and learning from error, intention to report events, adequate procedures and staffing, overall perceptions of patient safety </it>and <it>expectations and actions of managers</it>. Cronbach's alpha of the factors rated between 0.64 and 0.85. The subscales intercorrelated moderately, except for the factor about intention to report events. Respondents who graded patient safety highly scored significantly higher on the questionnaire than those who did not.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The SCOPE questionnaire seems an appropriate instrument to assess patient safety culture in general practice. The clinimetric properties of the SCOPE are promising, but future research should confirm the factor structure and construct of the SCOPE and delineate its responsiveness to changes in safety culture over time.</p

Global Research Priorities to Better Understand the Burden of Iatrogenic Harm in Primary Care: An International Delphi Exercise

There is a need to identify and reach agreement on key foci for patient safety research in primary care contexts and understand how these priorities differ between low-, middle-, and high-income settings. We conducted a modified Delphi exercise, which was distributed to an international panel of experts in patient safety and primary care. Family practice and pharmacy were considered the main contexts on which to focus attention in order to advance patient safety in primary care across all income categories. Other clinical contexts prioritised included community midwifery and nursing in low-income countries and care homes in high-income countries. The sources of patient safety incidents requiring further study across all economic settings that were identified were communication between health care professionals and with patients, teamwork within the health care team, laboratory and diagnostic imaging investigations, issues relating to data management, transitions between different care settings, and chart/patient record com- pleteness. This work lays the foundation for a range of research initiatives that aim to promote a more comprehensive appreciation of the burden of unsafe primary care, develop understanding of the main areas of risk, and identify interventions that can enhance the safety of primary care provision internationall