Albany College of Pharmacy Healthcare Management Case Study Analysis

Albany College of Pharmacy Healthcare Management Case Study Analysis

 

Learning from Defects

Investigation Process

1. What happened? (Reconstruct the timeline and explain what happened.  For this investigation, put yourself in the place of those involved, in the middle of the event as it was unfolding, to understand what they were thinking and the reasoning behind their actions/decisions.  Try to view the world as they did when the event occurred.)

   ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

 

 

1. Why did it happen? Below is a framework to help you review and evaluate your case.  Please read each contributing factor and evaluate whether it was involved.  If so, did it negatively contribute (increase harm) or positively contributed (reduce impact of harm) to the incident.  Rate the most important contributing factors that relate to this event.

 

Contributing Factors  (Example)	Negatively Contributed	Positively Contributed
Patient Factors:
Patient was acutely ill or agitated (Elderly patient in renal failure, secondary to congestive heart failure.)
There was a language barrier (Patient did not speak English)
There were personal or social issues (Patient declined therapy)
Task Factors:
Was there a protocol available to guide therapy? (Protocol for mixing medication concentrations is posted above the medication bin.)
Were test results available to help make care decision?  (Stat blood glucose results were sent in 20 minutes.)
Were tests results accurate?  (Four diagnostic tests done; only MRI results needed quickly—results faxed.)
Caregiver Factors
Was the caregiver fatigued? (Tired at the end of a double shift, nurse forgot to take a blood pressure reading.)
Did the caregiver’s outlook/perception of own professional role impact on this event?  (Doctor followed up to make sure cardiac consult was done expeditiously.)
Was the physical or mental health of the provider a factor? (Provider having personal issues and missed hearing a verbal order.)
Team Factors
Was verbal or written communication during hand offs clear, accurate, clinically relevant and goal directed?  (Oncoming care team was debriefed by out-going staff regarding patient’s condition.)
Was verbal or written communication during care clear, accurate, clinically relevant and goal directed?  (Staff was comfortable expressing his/her concern regarding high medication dose.)
Was verbal or written communication during crisis clear, accurate, clinically relevant and goal directed?  (Team leader quickly explained and direct his/her team regarding the plan of action.)
Was there a cohesive team structure with an identified and communicative leader?  (Attending physician gave clear instructions to the team.)
Training & Education Factors
Was provider knowledgeable, skilled & competent?  (Nurse knew dose ordered was not standard for that medication.)
Did provider follow the established protocol?   (Provider pulled protocol to ensure steps were followed.)
Did the provider seek supervision or help?  (New nurse asked preceptor to help her/him mix medication concentration)
Information Technology/CPOE Factors
Did the computer/software program generate an error?  (Heparin was chosen, but Digoxin printed on the order sheet.)
Did the computer/software malfunction?  (Computer shut down in the middle of provider’s order entry.)
Did the user check what he/she entered to make sure it was correct?  (Provider initially chose .25mg, but caught his/her error and changed it to .025mg.)
Local Environment
Was there adequate equipment available and was the equipment working properly?  (There were 2 extra ventilators stocked & recently serviced by clinical engineering.)
Was there adequate operational (administrative and managerial) support?  (Unit clerk out sick, but extra clerk sent to cover from another unit.)
Was the physical environment conducive to enhancing patient care?  (All beds were visible from the nurse’s station.)
Was there enough staff on the unit to care for patient volume?  (Nurse ratio was 1:1.)
Was there a good mix of skilled with new staff?  (There was a nurse orientee shadowing a senior nurse and an extra nurse on to cover senior nurse’s responsibilities.)
Did workload impact the provision of good care?  (Nurse caring for 3 patients because nurse went home sick.)
Institutional Environment
Were adequate financial resources available?  (Unit requested experienced patient transport team for critically patients and one was made available the next day.)
Were laboratory technicians adequately in-serviced/ educated?  (Lab tech was fully aware of complications related to thallium injection.)
Was there adequate staffing in the laboratory to run results?   (There were 3 dedicated laboratory technicians to run stat results.)
Were pharmacists adequately in-service/educated?   (Pharmacists knew and followed the protocol for stat medication orders.)
Did pharmacy have a good infrastructure (policy, procedures)?  (It was standard policy to have a second pharmacist do an independent check before dispensing medications.)
Was there adequate pharmacy staffing?  (There was a pharmacist dedicated to the ICU.)
Does hospital administration work with the units regarding what and how to support their needs?  (Guidelines established to hold new ICU admissions in the ER when beds not available in the ICU.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Review the above list of contributing factors and identify the most important factors related to this event.  Rate each contributing factor on its importance to this event and future events.

 

Contributing Factors	Importance to current event, 1 (low) to 5 (high)	Importance to future events, 1 (low) to 5 (high)

 

 

III.  How will you reduce the likelihood of this defect happening again? Develop an intervention for each of the important contributing factors identified above.  Develop interventions to defend against the 2 to 5 most important contributing factors.  Refer to the Strength of Interventions* chart below for examples of strong and weak interventions.  Then, rate each intervention on its ability to mitigate the contributing factor and on the team’s belief that the intervention will be implemented and executed.  Make an action plan for 2-5 of the highest scoring interventions.

 

Interventions to reduce the risk of the defect	Ability to mitigate the contributing factor, 1 (low to 5 (high)	Teams belief that the intervention will be implemented and executed, 1 (low) to 5 (high)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Select 2-5 of the highest scoring interventions and develop an action plan for implementation.

 

 

Specific interventions you will do to reduce the risk of the defect?	Who will lead this effort?	Follow up date

 

 

Strength of Interventions *

Weaker Actions	Intermediate Actions	Stronger Actions
Double Check	Checklists/ Cognitive Aid	Architectural/physical plant changes
Warnings and labels	Increased Staffing/Reduce workload	Tangible involvement and action by leadership in support of patient safety
New procedure, memorandum or policy	Redundancy	Simplify the process/remove unnecessary steps
Training and/or education	Enhance Communication (read-back, SBAR etc.)	Standardize equipment and/ or process of care map
Additional Study/analysis	Software enhancement/modifications	New device usability testing before purchasing
	Eliminate look alike and sound- a-likes	Engineering Control of interlock (forcing functions)
	Eliminate/reduce distractions

• Adapted from John Gosbee, MD, MS Human Factors Engineering
• Remember sometimes a weaker action is your only option.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. How will you know the risk is reduced? Ask frontline staff who were involved in the defect if the interventions reduced the likelihood of recurrence of the defect.  After the interventions are implemented complete the “Describe Defect” and “Interventions” sections and have staff complete this survey by rating the interventions.

 

 

Describe Defect:
Interventions	Intervention was effectively implemented, 1 (low) to 5 (high)	Intervention reduced the likelihood of recurrence, 1 (low) to 5 (high)