Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Joint Commission (joint + commission)
Selected AbstractsThe Creation of Emergency Health Care Standards for Catastrophic EventsACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 11 2006Robert A. Wise MD The creation of health care standards by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) in a defined area with known events follows a predictable process. A problem area (e.g., hand hygiene) is identified from multiple sources. The JCAHO then calls together experts from around the country, and through debate and the comparison of positions of various people within the health care arena, a new standard informed by these views can be developed. Once developed, it is vetted and becomes established as a Joint Commission standard. But what happens when an event has never happened, cannot be reliably predicted, and, one hopes, will never come to pass? How can one create any meaningful standards? This is the situation when considering a number of scenarios related to disasters and mass casualty events. [source] Adverse Event Reporting: Lessons Learned from 4 Years of Florida Office DataDERMATOLOGIC SURGERY, Issue 9 2005Brett Coldiron MD, FACP Background Patient safety regulations and medical error reporting systems have been at the forefront of current health care legislature. In 2000, Florida mandated that all physicians report, to a central collecting agency, all adverse events occurring in an office setting. Purpose To analyze the scope and incidence of adverse events and deaths resulting from office surgical procedures in Florida from 2000 to 2004. Methods We reviewed all reported adverse incidents (the death of a patient, serious injury, and subsequent hospital transfer) occurring in an office setting from March 1, 2000, through March 1, 2004, from the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration. We determined physician board certification status, hospital privileges, and office accreditation via telephone follow-up and Internet searches. Results Of 286 reported office adverse events, 77 occurred in association with an office surgical procedure (19 deaths and 58 hospital transfers). There were seven complications and five deaths associated with the use of intravenous sedation or general anesthesia. There were no adverse events associated with the use of dilute local (tumescent) anesthesia. Liposuction and/or abdominoplasty under general anesthesia or intravenous sedation were the most common surgical procedures associated with a death or complication. Fifty-three percent of offices reporting an adverse incident were accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, American Association for Accreditation of Ambulatory Surgical Facilities, or American Association for Ambulatory Health Care. Ninety-four percent of the involved physicians were board certified, and 97% had hospital privileges. Forty-two percent of the reported deaths were delayed by several hours to weeks after uneventful discharge or after hospital transfer. Conclusions Requiring physician board certification, physician hospital privileges, or office accreditation is not likely to reduce office adverse events. Restrictions on dilute local (tumescent) anesthesia for liposuction would not reduce adverse events and could increase adverse events if patients are shifted to riskier approaches. State and/or national legislation establishing adverse event reporting systems should be supported and should require the reporting of delayed deaths. [source] Profiles in Patient Safety: Antibiotic Timing in Pneumonia and Pay-for-performanceACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 7 2006Jesse M. Pines MD The delivery of antibiotics within four hours of hospital arrival for patients who are admitted with pneumonia, as mandated by the Joint Commission for the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, has gained considerable attention recently because of the plan to implement pay-for-performance for adherence to this standard. Although early antibiotic administration has been associated with improved survival for patients with pneumonia in two large retrospective studies, the effect on actual patient care and outcomes for patients with pneumonia and other emergency department patients of providing financial incentives and disincentives to hospitals for performance on this measure currently is unknown. This article provides an in-depth case-based description of the evidence behind antibiotic timing in pneumonia, discusses potential program effects, and analyzes how the practical implementation of pay-for-performance for pneumonia conforms to American Medical Association guidelines on pay-for-performance. [source] Interview with a Quality Leader: Paul Uhlig on Transforming HealthcareJOURNAL FOR HEALTHCARE QUALITY, Issue 3 2009Jason Trevor Fogg In 2002 Dr. Uhlig and the cardiac surgery team he led at Concord Hospital, Concord, NH, received the John M. Eisenberg Patient Safety Award from the National Quality Forum and the Joint Commission. Dr. Uhlig has received international recognition for research concerning patient safety, teamwork, and healthcare culture, including a 2007,2008 King James IV Professorship of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, Scotland. [source] ANGOLA,DR CONGO: Joint Commission To Address DisputeAFRICA RESEARCH BULLETIN: ECONOMIC, FINANCIAL AND TECHNICAL SERIES, Issue 4 2009Article first published online: 4 JUN 200 No abstract is available for this article. [source] Why do some hospital leaders "speak no evil" about their organizations' medical errors?JOURNAL OF LEADERSHIP STUDIES, Issue 3 2008Ruby A. Rouse Sentinel events, preventable medical errors resulting in serious disability or death, are a significant problem for hospital leaders. Accreditation agencies, such as the Joint Commission, urge hospitals to voluntarily disclose information about medical errors. However, some healthcare leaders "speak no evil" by choosing not to release sentinel-event data. In an effort to increase the reporting of medical errors, several states passed laws mandating disclosure of sentinel events to the government. The state-reported medical error rates of Indiana hospitals were compared with their leaders' perceptions of quality of care. Regardless of the number of sentinel events occurring at their hospitals, leaders consistently claimed their organizations provided high-quality care. Two theories, rationalization and gaming, are presented to explain why leaders do not acknowledge the presence of serious quality-management problems in their organizations. [source] Weekly E-mail Reminders Influence Emergency Physician Behavior: A Case Study Using the Joint Commission and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Pneumonia GuidelinesACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 7 2009Scott G. Weiner MD Abstract Objectives:, Improving physician compliance with evidence-based guidelines is challenging. The authors wanted to determine if weekly e-mail reminders to emergency department (ED) staff increase compliance with Joint Commission and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) community-acquired pneumonia quality measures. Methods:, One nurse administrator reviewed records on a weekly basis for all adult patients admitted to the hospital from the ED with a working diagnosis of pneumonia. An e-mail was then sent to all ED staff indicating the percentage of patients with antibiotic timing less than 4 hours from arrival. The names of individuals who administered antibiotics in less than 1 hour were highlighted. This study compared the time to antibiotics for 11 months before and 11 months after commencing this intervention. Results:, There were 281 patients in the control cohort, and 37 met exclusion criteria, leaving 244 for analysis. There were 342 patients in the intervention cohort, and 40 met exclusion criteria, leaving 302 for analysis. The median time from arrival to chest radiograph order decreased significantly from 61 to 47 minutes (p < 0.001). The median time interval from chest radiograph order to antibiotic administration did not change significantly (92 to 88 minutes, p = 0.294). The overall median time from arrival to antibiotic administration decreased significantly from 162 to 146 minutes (p = 0.018). The percentage of patients with antibiotic administration within 4 hours increased from 77.5% to 86.1% (p = 0.009). Conclusions:, Weekly e-mail reminders listing performance on antibiotic administration recommendations are associated with increased compliance with a clinical guideline. [source] Integration of safety technologies into rheumatology and orthopedics practices: A randomized, controlled trial,ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATISM, Issue 7 2008Gautam R. Moorjani Objective To identify and integrate new safety technologies into outpatient musculoskeletal procedures and measure the effect on outcome, including pain. Methods Using national resources for patient safety and literature review, the following safety technologies were identified: a safety needle to reduce inadvertent needlesticks to heath care workers, and the reciprocating procedure device (RPD) to improve patient safety and reduce pain. Five hundred sixty-six musculoskeletal procedures involving syringes and needles were randomized to either an RPD group or a conventional syringe group, and pain, quality, safety, and physician acceptance were measured. Results During 566 procedures, no accidental needlesticks occurred with safety needles. Use of the RPD resulted in a 35.4% reduction (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 24,46%) in patient-assessed pain (mean ± SD scores on a visual analog pain scale [VAPS] 3.12 ± 2.23 for the RPD and 4.83 ± 3.22 for the conventional syringe; P < 0.001) and a 49.5% reduction (95% CI 34,64%) in patient-assessed significant pain (VAPS score ,5) (P < 0.001). Physician acceptance of the RPD combined with a safety needle was excellent. Conclusion As mandated by the Joint Commission and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, safety technologies and the use of pain scales can be successfully integrated into rheumatologic and orthopedic procedures. The combination of a safety needle to reduce needlestick injuries to health care workers and the RPD to improve safety and outcome of patients is effective and well accepted by physicians. [source] Impact of Disaster Drills on Patient Flow in a Pediatric Emergency DepartmentACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 6 2008Nathan Timm MD Abstract Objectives:, Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO)-accredited hospitals must conduct disaster drills twice a year, with one incorporating a mass casualty incident to the emergency department (ED). The authors found no studies describing the potential negative impact on the quality of care real patients in the ED receive during these drills. The objective was to determine the impact that mass casualty drills have on the timeliness of care for nondisaster patients in a pediatric ED. Methods:, Since 2001, nine disaster drills involving mass casualties to the ED were conducted at the authors' institution. The authors studied 5-, 10-, and 24-hour blocks of time surrounding these events and defined quality measures as the timeliness of care in terms of length of stay (LOS) in ED, time-to-triage, and time-to-physician. Drill dates were compared with control dates (the same weekday on the following week). Paired t-tests were used to compare outcomes of interest between drill and control days. Results:, Nine drill days and nine control days were studied. There was no statistically significant difference between drill dates and control dates in average time-to-triage and time-to-emergency physician and average ED LOS. Admitted patients spent less time in the ED during drill dates. Conclusions:, Disaster drills at this institution do not appear to significantly affect the timeliness of care to nondisaster drill ED patients. Attention should be paid to the quality of care "real" patients receive to ensure that their care is not jeopardized during an artificial stress to the system during a disaster drill. [source] Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy for patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma in the prostate specific antigen eraCANCER, Issue 2 2002Anthony V. D'Amico M.D., Ph.D. Abstract BACKGROUND To the authors' knowledge, consensus is lacking regarding the relative long-term efficacy of radical prostatectomy (RP) versus conventional-dose external beam radiation therapy (RT) in the treatment of patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma. METHODS A retrospective cohort study of 2635 men treated with RP (n = 2254) or conventional-dose RT (n = 381) between 1988,2000 was performed. The primary endpoint was prostate specific antigen (PSA) survival stratified by treatment received and high-risk, intermediate-risk, or low-risk group based on the serum PSA level, biopsy Gleason score, 1992 American Joint Commission on Cancer clinical tumor category, and percent positive prostate biopsies. RESULTS Estimates of 8-year PSA survival (95% confidence interval [95% CI]) for low-risk patients (T1c,T2a, a PSA level , 10 ng/mL, and a Gleason score , 6) were 88% (95% CI, 85, 90) versus 78% (95% CI, 72, 83) for RP versus patients treated with RT, respectively. Eight-year estimates of PSA survival also favored RP for intermediate-risk patients (T2b or Gleason score 7 or a PSA level > 10 and , 20 ng/mL) with < 34% positive prostate biopsies, being 79% (95% CI, 73, 85) versus 65% (95% CI, 58, 72), respectively. Estimates of PSA survival in high-risk (T2c or PSA level > 20 ng/mL or Gleason score , 8) and intermediate-risk patients with at least 34% positive prostate biopsies initially favored RT, but were not significantly different after 8 years. CONCLUSIONS Intermediate-risk and low-risk patients with a low biopsy tumor volume who were treated with RP appeared to fare significantly better compared with patients who were treated using conventional-dose RT. Intermediate-risk and high-risk patients with a high biopsy tumor volume who were treated with RP or RT had long-term estimates of PSA survival that were not found to be significantly different. [See editorials on pages 211,4 and 215,8, this issue. Cancer 2002;95:281,6. © 2002 American Cancer Society. DOI 10.1002/cncr.10657 [source] The National Trend in Quality of Emergency Department Pain Management for Long Bone FracturesACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 2 2007PA-C, Tamara S. Ritsema MPH Background Despite national attention, there is little evidence that the quality of emergency department (ED) pain management is improving. Objectives To compare the quality of ED pain management before and after implementation of the Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations' standards in 2001. Methods The authors performed a retrospective cohort study by using the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 1998,2003. Patients who presented to the ED with a long bone fracture (femur, humerus, tibia, fibula, radius, or ulna) were compared. The authors extracted data on patient, visit, and hospital characteristics. The primary outcomes were the proportion of patients who received assessment of pain severity and who received analgesic treatment. Results There were 2,064 patients with a qualifying fracture in the study period, 834 from 1998,2000 and 1,230 from 2001,2003. Compared with the early period, a higher proportion of patients in the late period had their pain assessed (74% vs. 57%), received opiates (56% vs. 50%), and received any analgesic (76% vs. 56%). Patients in the late period had higher odds of receiving any analgesia (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.43) and opioid analgesia (adjusted OR, 1.27) compared with the early period. Patients in the middle age group (adjusted OR, 2.28) or those seen by physician assistants (adjusted OR, 2.05) were more likely, whereas those with Medicaid (adjusted OR, 0.58) and those in the Northeast were less likely, to receive opiates. Conclusions Although the quality of ED pain management for acute fractures appears to be improving, there is still room for further improvement. [source] Pain Assessments and the Provision of Analgesia: The Effects of a Templated ChartACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 1 2007Brigitte M. Baumann MD Abstract Objectives Many emergency departments (EDs) have incorporated pain assessment scales in the medical record to improve compliance with the requirements of the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. The authors conducted a pre-post trial investigating the effects of introducing a templated chart on the documentation of pain assessments and the provision of analgesia to ED patients. Methods A total of 2,379 charts were reviewed for inclusion based on the presence of a chief complaint related to trauma or nontraumatic pain, with 1,242 charts included in the analysis. Results Baseline demographic characteristics, mechanism of injury, location of injury, and initial pain severity were similar in the two groups. The proportion of patients with documentation of pain assessment increased from 41% to 57% (p < 0.001). In particular, traumatic mechanisms and chest, abdominal, and extremity pain yielded the largest improvements in documentation after introduction of the templated charts. Documentation of pain descriptors also improved for time of onset, duration, timing, and context (p < 0.01). Pain control in the templated chart group, however, remained unchanged and the provision of analgesia in the ED was not altered, with the exception of nonsteroidal medications, which decreased from 46% to 36% (p < 0.01). Conclusions Although documentation is improved with a templated chart, this improvement did not translate into improved patient care. [source] | ||||||||||