Browsing by Author "Glassman, Peter A."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Care Coordination Strategies and Barriers during Medication Safety Incidents: a Qualitative, Cognitive Task Analysis
    (Springer, 2021) Russ-Jara, Alissa L.; Luckhurst, Cherie L.; Dismore, Rachel A.; Arthur, Karen J.; Ifeachor, Amanda P.; Militello, Laura G.; Glassman, Peter A.; Zillich, Alan J.; Weiner, Michael; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background: Medication errors are prevalent in healthcare institutions worldwide, often arising from difficulties in care coordination among primary care providers, specialists, and pharmacists. Greater knowledge about care coordination surrounding medication safety incidents can inform efforts to improve patient safety. Objectives: To identify strategies that hospital and outpatient healthcare professionals (HCPs) use, and barriers encountered, when they coordinate care during a medication safety incident involving an adverse drug reaction, drug-drug interaction, or drug-renal concern. Design: We asked HCPs to complete a form whenever they encountered these incidents and intervened to prevent or mitigate patient harm. We stratified incidents across HCP roles and incident categories to conduct follow-up cognitive task analysis interviews with HCPs. Participants: We invited all physicians and pharmacists working in inpatient or outpatient care at a tertiary Veterans Affairs Medical Center. We examined 24 incidents: 12 from physicians and 12 from pharmacists, with a total of 8 incidents per category. Approach: Interviews were transcribed and analyzed via a two-stage inductive, qualitative analysis. In stage 1, we analyzed each incident to identify decision requirements. In stage 2, we analyzed results across incidents to identify emergent themes. Key results: Most incidents (19, 79%) were from outpatient care. HCPs relied on four main strategies to coordinate care: cognitive decentering; collaborative decision-making; back-up behaviors; and contingency planning. HCPs encountered four main barriers: role ambiguity and constraints, breakdowns (e.g., delays) in care, challenges related to the electronic health record, and factors that increased coordination complexity. Each strategy and barrier occurred across all incident categories and HCP groups. Pharmacists went to extra effort to ensure safety plans were implemented. Conclusions: Similar strategies and barriers were evident across HCP groups and incident types. Strategies for enhancing patient safety may be strengthened by deliberate organizational support. Some barriers could be addressed by improving work systems.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Strategies prescribers and pharmacists use to identify and mitigate adverse drug reactions in inpatient and outpatient care: a cognitive task analysis at a US Veterans Affairs Medical Center
    (BMJ, 2022-02-21) Nguyen, Khoa Anh; Militello, Laura G.; Ifeachor, Amanda; Arthur, Karen J.; Glassman, Peter A.; Zillich, Alan J.; Weiner, Michael; Russ-Jara, Alissa L.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Objective: To develop a descriptive model of the cognitive processes used to identify and resolve adverse drug reactions (ADRs) from the perspective of healthcare providers in order to inform future informatics efforts SETTING: Inpatient and outpatient care at a tertiary care US Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Participants: Physicians, nurse practitioners and pharmacists who report ADRs. Outcomes: Descriptive model and emerging themes from interviews. Results: We conducted critical decision method interviews with 10 physicians and 10 pharmacists. No nurse practitioners submitted ADR incidents. We generated a descriptive model of an ADR decision-making process and analysed emerging themes, categorised into four stages: detection of potential ADR, investigation of the problem's cause, risk/benefit consideration, and plan, action and follow-up. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) relied on several confirmatory or disconfirmatory cues to detect and investigate potential ADRs. Evaluating risks and benefits of related medications played an essential role in HCPs' pursuits of solutions CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an illustrative model of how HCPs detect problems and make decisions regarding ADRs. The design of supporting technology for potential ADR problems should align with HCPs' real-world cognitive strategies, to assist fully in detecting and preventing ADRs for patients.