John R. Clarke

The Pennsylvania Patient Safety Authority receives over 235,000 reports of medical error per year. Near miss and serious event reports of common and interesting problems are analysed to identify best practices for preventing harmful errors. Dissemination of this evidence-based information in the peer-reviewed Pennsylvania Patient Safety Advisory and presentations to medical staffs are not sufficient for adoption of best practices. Adoption of best practices has required working with institutions to identify local barriers to and incentives for adopting best practices and redesigning the delivery system to make desired behaviour easy and undesirable behaviour more difficult. Collaborations, where institutions can learn from the experiences of others, have show decreases in harmful events. The Pennsylvania Program to Prevent Wrong-Site Surgery is used as an example. Two collaborations to prevent wrong-site surgery have been completed, one with 30 institutions in eastern Pennsylvania and one with 19 in western Pennsylvania. The first collaboration achieved a 73% decrease in the rolling average of wrong-site events over 18 months. The second collaboration experienced no wrong-site operating room procedures over more than one year.

We review what leaders of health care systems, including chief executive officers and board members, need to know to have “patient safety literacy” and do to make their systems safe. High reliability organizations produce reliable results that are not dependent on providers being perfect. Their characteristics include the commitment of leadership to safety as a system responsibility, with a culture of safety that decreases variability with standardized care and does not condone “at-risk behavior.” A business case can be made for investing resources into systems that produce good outcomes reliably. Leaders must see patient safety problems as problems with their system, not with their employees. Leaders need to give providers information to make and monitor system progress. All medical errors, including near misses, and processes associated with all adverse events may provide information for system improvement. Improving systems should produce better long-term results than educating workers to be more careful. (Am J Med Qual 2007;22:311-318)

Objective: We sought to identify factors contributing to wrong-site surgery (wrong patient, procedure, side, or part). Methods: We examined all reports from all hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers—in a state that requires reporting of wrong-site surgery—from the initiation of the reporting requirement in June 2004 through December 2006. Results: Over 30 months, there were 427 reports of near misses (253) or surgical interventions started (174) involving the wrong patient (34), wrong procedure (39), wrong side (298), and/or wrong part (60); 83 patients had incorrect procedures done to completion. Procedures on the lower extremities were the most common (30%). Common contributions to errors resulting in the initiation of wrong-site surgery involved patient positioning (20) and anesthesia interventions (29) before any planned time-out process, not verifying consents (22) or site markings (16), and not doing a proper time-out process (17). Actions involving operating surgeons contributed to 92. Common sources of successful recovery to prevent wrong-site surgery were patients (57), circulating nurses (30), and verifying consents (43). Interestingly, 31 formal time-out processes were unsuccessful in preventing “wrong” surgery. Conclusions: Wrong-site surgery continues to occur regularly, especially wrong-side surgery, even with formal site verification. Many errors occur before the time-out; some persist despite the verification protocol. Patients and nurses are the surgeons’ best allies. Verification, starting with verification of the consent, needs to occur at multiple points before the incision.