The morbidity and mortality conference as an adverse event surveillance tool in a paediatric intensive care unit

Christina L. Cifra, Kareen L. Jones, Judith Ascenzi, Utpal S. Bhalala, Melania Bembea, James C Fackler, Marlene R. Miller

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: To determine if standardised chart review applied to records of patients discussed at a paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) morbidity and mortality conference (MMC) yields additional or different information regarding safety event occurrence and characteristics. Design: Retrospective record review. Setting: Single tertiary referral PICU in Baltimore, Maryland, USA. Participants: 96 patients discussed at the PICU MMC over 14 months (November 2011-December 2012). Main outcome measures: Safety events and their characteristics (medical error category, severity and preventability). Results: A total of 275 safety events were identified through the MMC and/or chart review. The MMC identified 131 (48%) events, 53 (19%) of which were identified through the MMC alone. After chart review was performed, an additional 144 (52%) events were identified. 78 (28%) events were identified through both. High severity adverse events potentially contributing to permanent harm or death were more likely to be identified through both the MMC and chart review (47%) compared with either alone. The MMC alone identified more near-misses (21%) and preventable events (96%) compared with chart review alone or both MMC and chart review. Although chart review alone helped to identify many healthcare-associated infections, medication errors and sedation/pain control issues not elicited through the MMC, the MMC alone identified more communication errors and workflow problems. The MMC alone also identified 40% of all diagnostic errors, which would not have been discovered otherwise despite chart review by itself identifying 50% of such misdiagnoses. Conclusions: Standardised chart review applied to records of patients discussed at a PICU MMC identified significantly more safety events not initially discovered through the MMC. However, the MMC was superior to chart review in identifying broader problems such as communication errors, workflow issues and certain diagnostic errors not captured by chart review, which can potentially affect many aspects of care.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)930-938
Number of pages9
JournalBMJ Quality and Safety
Volume23
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2014

Fingerprint

Pediatric Intensive Care Units
Morbidity
Mortality
Diagnostic Errors
Safety
Workflow
Communication
Medical Errors
Medication Errors
Baltimore
Cross Infection

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

The morbidity and mortality conference as an adverse event surveillance tool in a paediatric intensive care unit. / Cifra, Christina L.; Jones, Kareen L.; Ascenzi, Judith; Bhalala, Utpal S.; Bembea, Melania; Fackler, James C; Miller, Marlene R.

In: BMJ Quality and Safety, Vol. 23, No. 11, 01.11.2014, p. 930-938.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cifra, Christina L. ; Jones, Kareen L. ; Ascenzi, Judith ; Bhalala, Utpal S. ; Bembea, Melania ; Fackler, James C ; Miller, Marlene R. / The morbidity and mortality conference as an adverse event surveillance tool in a paediatric intensive care unit. In: BMJ Quality and Safety. 2014 ; Vol. 23, No. 11. pp. 930-938.
@article{c3fd5d5c837c425297e176be64f50c99,
title = "The morbidity and mortality conference as an adverse event surveillance tool in a paediatric intensive care unit",
abstract = "Objective: To determine if standardised chart review applied to records of patients discussed at a paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) morbidity and mortality conference (MMC) yields additional or different information regarding safety event occurrence and characteristics. Design: Retrospective record review. Setting: Single tertiary referral PICU in Baltimore, Maryland, USA. Participants: 96 patients discussed at the PICU MMC over 14 months (November 2011-December 2012). Main outcome measures: Safety events and their characteristics (medical error category, severity and preventability). Results: A total of 275 safety events were identified through the MMC and/or chart review. The MMC identified 131 (48{\%}) events, 53 (19{\%}) of which were identified through the MMC alone. After chart review was performed, an additional 144 (52{\%}) events were identified. 78 (28{\%}) events were identified through both. High severity adverse events potentially contributing to permanent harm or death were more likely to be identified through both the MMC and chart review (47{\%}) compared with either alone. The MMC alone identified more near-misses (21{\%}) and preventable events (96{\%}) compared with chart review alone or both MMC and chart review. Although chart review alone helped to identify many healthcare-associated infections, medication errors and sedation/pain control issues not elicited through the MMC, the MMC alone identified more communication errors and workflow problems. The MMC alone also identified 40{\%} of all diagnostic errors, which would not have been discovered otherwise despite chart review by itself identifying 50{\%} of such misdiagnoses. Conclusions: Standardised chart review applied to records of patients discussed at a PICU MMC identified significantly more safety events not initially discovered through the MMC. However, the MMC was superior to chart review in identifying broader problems such as communication errors, workflow issues and certain diagnostic errors not captured by chart review, which can potentially affect many aspects of care.",
author = "Cifra, {Christina L.} and Jones, {Kareen L.} and Judith Ascenzi and Bhalala, {Utpal S.} and Melania Bembea and Fackler, {James C} and Miller, {Marlene R.}",
year = "2014",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003000",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "930--938",
journal = "BMJ Quality and Safety",
issn = "2044-5415",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The morbidity and mortality conference as an adverse event surveillance tool in a paediatric intensive care unit

AU - Cifra, Christina L.

AU - Jones, Kareen L.

AU - Ascenzi, Judith

AU - Bhalala, Utpal S.

AU - Bembea, Melania

AU - Fackler, James C

AU - Miller, Marlene R.

PY - 2014/11/1

Y1 - 2014/11/1

N2 - Objective: To determine if standardised chart review applied to records of patients discussed at a paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) morbidity and mortality conference (MMC) yields additional or different information regarding safety event occurrence and characteristics. Design: Retrospective record review. Setting: Single tertiary referral PICU in Baltimore, Maryland, USA. Participants: 96 patients discussed at the PICU MMC over 14 months (November 2011-December 2012). Main outcome measures: Safety events and their characteristics (medical error category, severity and preventability). Results: A total of 275 safety events were identified through the MMC and/or chart review. The MMC identified 131 (48%) events, 53 (19%) of which were identified through the MMC alone. After chart review was performed, an additional 144 (52%) events were identified. 78 (28%) events were identified through both. High severity adverse events potentially contributing to permanent harm or death were more likely to be identified through both the MMC and chart review (47%) compared with either alone. The MMC alone identified more near-misses (21%) and preventable events (96%) compared with chart review alone or both MMC and chart review. Although chart review alone helped to identify many healthcare-associated infections, medication errors and sedation/pain control issues not elicited through the MMC, the MMC alone identified more communication errors and workflow problems. The MMC alone also identified 40% of all diagnostic errors, which would not have been discovered otherwise despite chart review by itself identifying 50% of such misdiagnoses. Conclusions: Standardised chart review applied to records of patients discussed at a PICU MMC identified significantly more safety events not initially discovered through the MMC. However, the MMC was superior to chart review in identifying broader problems such as communication errors, workflow issues and certain diagnostic errors not captured by chart review, which can potentially affect many aspects of care.

AB - Objective: To determine if standardised chart review applied to records of patients discussed at a paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) morbidity and mortality conference (MMC) yields additional or different information regarding safety event occurrence and characteristics. Design: Retrospective record review. Setting: Single tertiary referral PICU in Baltimore, Maryland, USA. Participants: 96 patients discussed at the PICU MMC over 14 months (November 2011-December 2012). Main outcome measures: Safety events and their characteristics (medical error category, severity and preventability). Results: A total of 275 safety events were identified through the MMC and/or chart review. The MMC identified 131 (48%) events, 53 (19%) of which were identified through the MMC alone. After chart review was performed, an additional 144 (52%) events were identified. 78 (28%) events were identified through both. High severity adverse events potentially contributing to permanent harm or death were more likely to be identified through both the MMC and chart review (47%) compared with either alone. The MMC alone identified more near-misses (21%) and preventable events (96%) compared with chart review alone or both MMC and chart review. Although chart review alone helped to identify many healthcare-associated infections, medication errors and sedation/pain control issues not elicited through the MMC, the MMC alone identified more communication errors and workflow problems. The MMC alone also identified 40% of all diagnostic errors, which would not have been discovered otherwise despite chart review by itself identifying 50% of such misdiagnoses. Conclusions: Standardised chart review applied to records of patients discussed at a PICU MMC identified significantly more safety events not initially discovered through the MMC. However, the MMC was superior to chart review in identifying broader problems such as communication errors, workflow issues and certain diagnostic errors not captured by chart review, which can potentially affect many aspects of care.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84908051456&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84908051456&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003000

DO - 10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003000

M3 - Article

C2 - 25038037

AN - SCOPUS:84908051456

VL - 23

SP - 930

EP - 938

JO - BMJ Quality and Safety

JF - BMJ Quality and Safety

SN - 2044-5415

IS - 11

ER -