Adverse Event Rates in Interventional Radiology: A Review of 30 Years of Societal Quality Improvement Publications

Aren B. Mnatzakanian,Colin P. Cantwell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-024-03859-x

2024-10-02

CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology

Abstract:Graphical

radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging,cardiac & cardiovascular systems

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

A 3-year review of MRI safety incidents within a UK independent sector provider of diagnostic services

Darren Hudson,Andrew P Jones

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/bjro.20180006

2019-07-01

BJR|Open

Abstract:A review of MRI safety incidents conducted over a 3-year period for a large independent sector diagnostic imaging provider in the UK. The review took a systematic approach using reports logged on an internal incident reporting system that were then categorised and analysed for themes and trends. Notable cases and actions taken are also described from within the period. MRI safety-related events made up 7.5% of the total number of incident reports submitted and 15.5% of all MRI-related reports. The MR safety-related incidence report rate was 0.05% (1 per 1987 patients), which is relatively low considering the number of patients seen in our facilities each day. Internal MRI safety events indicated the main trends to be around referral of contraindicated devices (32% of reports) and failure in the screening process (21.5%—either due to unexpected implants or being unable to confirm safety). To improve practice and work to reduce incidents, advice and instructional materials were developed. The review suggests a potential approach to categorisation of MRI-related safety events which could allow comparisons to be made across organisations, helping to look for trends and guide learning. It also provides insight into the state of MRI safety within the organisation, a rationale for some of the interventions introduced to improve safety, and discussion around common issues arising in MRI safety.
Complications in Interventional Radiology: the role of clinical governance and iterative hospital systems in quality improvement

Warren Clements,Jim Koukounaras

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s42155-023-00388-5

2023-08-05

Abstract:As modern Interventional Radiology (IR) evolves, and expands in scope and complexity, it will push the boundaries of existing literature. However, with all intervention comes risk and it is the shared judgement of the risk-benefit analysis which underpins the ethical and legal principles of care in IR.Complications in medicine are common, said to occur in 9.2% of in-hospital healthcare interactions. Healthcare complications also come at considerable cost. It is estimated that in the UK, prolonging hospital stays to manage complications can cost ₤2 billion per year.However, complications can't be viewed in isolation. Clinical governance is the umbrella within which complications are viewed. It can be defined as a broadly integrated and systematic approach to clinical care and accountability, that seeks to focus on quality of healthcare. This concept incorporates complications but acknowledges their interplay within a complex healthcare system in which negative adverse events are influenced by a range of intrinsic and extrinsic factors. It also includes the processes that result from monitoring and learning from complications, with feedback leading to systems-based improvements in care moving forward. The reality is that complications are uncommonly the result of medical negligence, but rather they are an unfortunate by-product of a healthcare industry with inherent risk.It is also important to remember that complications are not just a number on an audit sheet, but a potentially life-changing event for every patient that is affected. The events that follow immediately from an adverse outcome such as open disclosure are vital, and have implications for how that patient experiences healthcare and trusts healthcare professionals for the rest of their life. We must ensure that the patient and their family maintain trust in healthcare professionals into the future.Credentialling and accreditation are imperative for Interventional Radiologists to meet existing standards as well deal with challenging situations. These should integrate and align within the structure of an organization that has a safety and learning culture. It is the many layers of organisational clinical governance that arguably play the most important role in IR-related complications, rather than apportioning blame to an individual IR.
Trends in Medicare Reimbursement for Interventional Radiology Procedures: 2007-2020

Soryan Kumar,Aditya Khurana,Jack Haglin,Rohit Khurana,Douglas Hidlay,Adam E M Eltorai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.43840

2023-08-21

Cureus

Abstract:Purpose: Declining physician reimbursement has been occurring across multiple specialties due to changes in Medicare legislation, including the Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act (DRA), the Balanced Budget Act, and the Sustainable Growth Rate. The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in Medicare reimbursement rates for various procedural classes in interventional radiology from 2007 to 2020. Methods: Common interventional radiology procedures were selected across multiple procedural classes: gastrointestinal, biliary, urinary, fallopian dilatation, other injection/change/removal, iliac vascular, femoral/popliteal vascular, tibial/peroneal vascular, hepatobiliary, and vascular emergency. The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services was queried for current procedural terminology (CPT) codes to extract reimbursement data. All monetary data were adjusted for inflation using the United States consumer price index (CPI). The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) and average annual change in reimbursement were calculated based on these adjusted trends. Results: Aside from urinary and vascular emergency procedures, all other procedural classes experienced decreases in inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursement from 2007 to 2020. The greatest mean decrease in reimbursement rates was observed in biliary procedures (-$21.25), while the largest mean increase in reimbursement rates was observed in vascular emergency procedures ($3.23). All procedures with increases in reimbursement rates and 36.8% of procedures with decreases in reimbursement rates have a CPT code change between 2007 and 2020. Conclusion: After accounting for inflation, reimbursement rates were shown to decline for all procedural classes except for urinary and vascular emergencies. Congressional policies, such as the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) and the Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Reauthorization Act of 2015, may clarify some of these trends.
Association between improved adenoma detection rates and interval colorectal cancer rates after a quality improvement program

Angela Y. Lam,Yan Li,Dyanna L. Gregory,Joanne Prinz,Jacqueline O’Reilly,Michael Manka,John E. Pandolfino,Rajesh N. Keswani

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.02.016

IF: 10.396

2020-08-01

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Abstract:<h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Background and Aims</h3><p>Although colonoscopy reduces colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, interval CRCs (iCRCs) still occur. We aimed to determine iCRC incidence, assess the relationship between adenoma detection rates (ADRs) and iCRC rates, and evaluate iCRC rates over time concomitant with initiation of an institutional colonoscopy QI program.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Methods</h3><p>We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent colonoscopy at an academic medical center (January 2003 to December 2015). We identified iCRCs through our data warehouse, and reviewed charts to confirm appropriateness for study inclusion. An iCRC was defined as a cancer diagnosed 6 to 60 months and an early iCRC diagnosed 6 to 36 months after index colonoscopy. We measured the relationship between provider ADRs and iCRC rates, and assessed iCRC rates over time with initiation of a QI program that started in 2010.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Results</h3><p>A total of 193,939 colonoscopies were performed over the study period. We identified 186 patients with iCRC. The overall iCRC rate was 0.12% and the early iCRC rate was 0.06%. Average-risk patients undergoing colonoscopy by highest ADR quartile (34%-52%) endoscopists had a 4-fold lower iCRC risk (RR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11-0.48) than those undergoing colonoscopy by a lowest quartile (12%-21%) endoscopist. After QI program initiation, overall iCRC rates improved from 0.15% to 0.08% (p<0.001) and early iCRC rates improved from 0.07% to 0.04% (p=0.004).</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Conclusions</h3><p>We confirmed that iCRC rate is inversely correlated with provider ADR. ADR increased and iCRC rates decreased over time, concomitant with a QI program focused on split-dose bowel preparation, quality metric measurement, provider education and feedback. iCRC rate measurement should be considered a feasible, outcomes-driven institutional metric of colonoscopy quality.</p>

gastroenterology & hepatology
Interventional radiology. A survey of staff, imaging equipment and procedures

Zi-Xuan Wang,Lin Li,Yi-Fan Zhao

Abstract:Aim: To explore the current situation and problems of interventional radiology (IR) staff, imaging equipment and procedures in hospitals. Methods: An electronic questionnaire was sent to 186 officially registered secondary and tertiary hospitals through a dedicated network for medical administration in a city in China. Data collection efforts ceased two weeks after the questionnaire was sent out. Results: The response rate was 100%. IR procedures were provided in 22 hospitals (11.8%). 50.0% were 2A level hospitals. 95.5% began to perform IR procedures in the last three decades. The IR workload of 3A level hospitals was significantly heavier than that in 3B or 2 level hospitals (1139.20±699.32 vs. 95.60±45.48, 1139.20±699.32 vs. 85.17±61.15; P<0.001). There were more senior interventional radiologists than juniors (43 vs. 41), and insufficient radiographers (radiographer-equipment ratio 0.91 ± 0.54). Thirteen hospitals (59.1%) had set up independent IR departments, and several clinical departments provided IR service at the same time in ten hospitals. Conclusions: The IR specialty of 3A hospitals had obvious advantages in staff, imaging equipment, and procedure volume over other hospitals. It should be noted that there were fewer junior interventional radiologists and the number of radiographers was inadequate. Further attract the talents to the IR field is important in future. Key words: Interventional radiology, Imaging equipment, Survey, Staff, Workload.
Public Awareness of Interventional Radiology: Population-Based Analysis of the Current State of and Pathways for Improvement

Brandon Rodgers,Kyleigh A Rodgers,Jeffrey Forris Beecham Chick,Mina S Makary

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2023.01.033

Abstract:Purpose: To evaluate the awareness of interventional radiology (IR) among the public and identify methods for improvement. Materials and methods: Participants (N = 1,000) were anonymously surveyed using Amazon's Mechanical Turk crowdsourcing platform about medical and IR-specific knowledge, preferred methods of acquisition of medical information, and suggestions for improving awareness of IR. The survey consisted of 69 questions, including both Likert Scale and free text questions. Results: Of the participants, 92% preferred undergoing a minimally invasive procedure over surgery. However, 39.8% recognized IR as a medical specialty, and less than 50% of these participants correctly identified IR as procedurally oriented. Of those who discussed or underwent an IR procedure (n = 113), most were also offered to undergo the procedure performed by a surgeon (n = 66). Furthermore, 71% (n = 20) of those who underwent the procedure performed by a surgeon reported that lack of awareness of IR played a role in their decision. Almost half of the respondents (n = 458) were interested in learning more about IR, particularly the diseases treated and procedures performed (42% and 37%, respectively). Short (<10-minute) educational videos and increased patient education by primary care providers (PCPs) were among the most suggested ways to improve awareness. Regarding the ambiguity of the name "interventional radiology," most respondents (n = 555) reported this to be true, and "minimally invasive radiologist" was the most preferred alternative (21.18%). Conclusions: Lack of awareness of IR may underlie underutilization. When presented with the knowledge that IR improves patient outcomes, minimally invasive procedures by an interventional radiologist are more often desired by the public than surgical options. Educational videos and patient education by PCPs may increase awareness of IR.
Hospital-Based Quality Improvement Interventions for Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review

Ehete Bahiru,Anubha Agarwal,Mark A Berendsen,Abigail S Baldridge,Tecla Temu,Amy Rogers,Carey Farquhar,Frederick Bukachi,Mark D Huffman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.118.005513

Abstract:Background: Quality improvement initiatives have been developed to improve acute coronary syndrome care largely in high-income country settings. We sought to synthesize the effect size and quality of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies for hospital-based acute coronary syndrome quality improvement interventions on clinical outcomes and process of care measures for their potential implementation in low- and middle-income country settings. Methods and results: We conducted a bibliometric search of databases and trial registers and a hand search in 2016 and performed an updated search in May 2018 and May 2019. We performed data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and quality of evidence assessments in duplicate. We assessed differences in outcomes by study design comparing RCTs to nonrandomized quasi-experimental studies and by country income status. A meta-analysis was not feasible due to substantial, unexplained heterogeneity among the included studies, and thus, we present a qualitative synthesis. We screened 5858 records and included 32 studies (14 RCTs [n=109 763] and 18 nonrandomized quasi-experimental studies [n=54-423]). In-hospital mortality ranged from 2.1% to 4.8% in the intervention groups versus 3.3% to 5.1% in the control groups in 5 RCTs (n=55 942). Five RCTs (n=64 313) reported 3.0% to 31.0% higher rates of reperfusion for patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in the intervention groups. The effect sizes for in-hospital and discharge medical therapies in a majority of RCTs were 3.0% to 10.0% higher in the intervention groups. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality evaluated by 4 RCTs (n=42 384), which reported 2.5% to 15.0% versus 5.9% to 22% 30-day mortality rates in the intervention versus control groups. In contrast, nonrandomized quasi-experimental studies reported larger effect sizes compared to RCTs. There were no significant consistent differences in outcomes between high-income and middle-income countries. Low-income countries were not represented in any of the included studies. Conclusions: Hospital-based acute coronary syndrome quality improvement interventions have a modest effect on process of care measures but not on clinical outcomes with expected differences by study design. Although quality improvement programs have an ongoing and important role for acute coronary syndrome quality of care in high-income country settings, further research will help to identify key components for contextualizing and implementing such interventions to new settings to achieve their desired effects. Systematic Review Registration: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/. Unique identifier: CRD42016047604.
An overview of end arterial interventional radiology infectious complications

Rohit Singh Jadoun,Vandna,Rahul Kumar,Pushpendra Saini,Somya Gautam

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30574/wjbphs.2022.12.1.0156

2022-10-30

World Journal of Biology Pharmacy and Health Sciences

Abstract:Over 7 million patients worldwide have end arterial interventional radiology procedures (EAIRP). These procedures are now a standard tool in vascular surgery. On the other hand, little is known about the infections connected to these medical procedures. It's possible to underestimate the prevalence and adverse effects of infectious complications (IC) after EAIRP. Our objective is to calculate the incidence and outcome trends across the country for EAIRP. The PMSI's database is instantly accessible and has been amassed over time. The Common Classification of Medical Acts codes represents the homogeneous population to evaluate endovascular interventional radiology therapy. Through various stages of the study, this protocol will call for proficiency in medicine, epidemiology, statistics, data processing, and procedures.
Abstract No. 575 Site of Service Practice Patterns for Interventional Radiologists and Advanced Practice Providers in Academic and Private Practices

B. Triana,A. Medema,C. Kim,J. Martin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2023.12.532

IF: 3.682

2024-02-23

Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology

Abstract:Interventional radiology (IR) services may be performed at either hospital facilities ("facility sites") or office-based labs ("office sites"). Office sites are typically lower cost settings, yet lack the ability to escalate care to an emergency department or inpatient service if needed. This work aims to characterize the utilization of facility and office sites of service for interventional radiologists (IRs) and advanced practice providers (APPs) within private practices (PP) and academic

radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging,peripheral vascular disease
Publication of quality improvement in medical oncology: A descriptive numerical summary from a scoping review.

Laavanya Dharmakulaseelan,Bryan B. Franco,Matthew C. Cheung,Adam E. Haynes,Brian M. Wong,Simron Singh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2016.34.7_suppl.251

IF: 45.3

2016-03-01

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:251 Background: Quality improvement (QI) is becoming a professional expectation and essential to medical oncology practice. A study of medical oncologists found that most QI interventions are not published, suggesting barriers to knowledge dissemination. We aim to describe the authors, settings of QI interventions, and publishing journals of scholarly QI literature. Methods: We conducted a scoping review using Arksey and O'Malley's framework. A search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases found 48,186 unique English citations from January 2001 to August 2014. Two independent reviewers were responsible for screening the search results and 270 studies were included. Characteristics of first authors, settings of QI interventions, and publishing journals were charted. We used online search engines to find institutional profiles to obtain author and institutional information. A descriptive numerical summary analysis was used to summarize and report the results. Results: The number of QI publications has increased over time, with 60 between 2001 and 2006 and 199 from 2007 to 2013. The majority of first authors are clinicians (65%), of which 59% are physicians, 31% are nurses, and 5% are pharmacists. Furthermore, 27% of first authors are primarily researchers whereas 5% are solely administrators. In addition to professional degrees, having an advanced degree was common amongst clinicians (48% of physicians, 85% of nurses, 44% of pharmacists). Forty-four percent of interventions were conducted in settings affiliated with an academic institution, as opposed to community-based settings. Only 9% of articles were published in a quality of care focused journal. Conclusions: Our scoping review found that most first authors of QI interventions are clinicians, many with an advanced degree in academic settings (rather than community-based settings where most patients receive care). The lack of studies published in quality of care focused journals may result in lost opportunities for knowledge transfer. These findings suggest that more effective knowledge dissemination and increased support for QI studies are needed to further the science of quality and ultimately improve quality of care.

oncology
The Safety of Inpatient Health Care

David W Bates,David M Levine,Hojjat Salmasian,Ania Syrowatka,David M Shahian,Stuart Lipsitz,Jonathan P Zebrowski,Laura C Myers,Merranda S Logan,Christopher G Roy,Christine Iannaccone,Michelle L Frits,Lynn A Volk,Sevan Dulgarian,Mary G Amato,Heba H Edrees,Luke Sato,Patricia Folcarelli,Jonathan S Einbinder,Mark E Reynolds,Elizabeth Mort

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa2206117

2023-01-12

Abstract:Background: Adverse events during hospitalization are a major cause of patient harm, as documented in the 1991 Harvard Medical Practice Study. Patient safety has changed substantially in the decades since that study was conducted, and a more current assessment of harm during hospitalization is warranted. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to assess the frequency, preventability, and severity of patient harm in a random sample of admissions from 11 Massachusetts hospitals during the 2018 calendar year. The occurrence of adverse events was assessed with the use of a trigger method (identification of information in a medical record that was previously shown to be associated with adverse events) and from review of medical records. Trained nurses reviewed records and identified admissions with possible adverse events that were then adjudicated by physicians, who confirmed the presence and characteristics of the adverse events. Results: In a random sample of 2809 admissions, we identified at least one adverse event in 23.6%. Among 978 adverse events, 222 (22.7%) were judged to be preventable and 316 (32.3%) had a severity level of serious (i.e., caused harm that resulted in substantial intervention or prolonged recovery) or higher. A preventable adverse event occurred in 191 (6.8%) of all admissions, and a preventable adverse event with a severity level of serious or higher occurred in 29 (1.0%). There were seven deaths, one of which was deemed to be preventable. Adverse drug events were the most common adverse events (accounting for 39.0% of all events), followed by surgical or other procedural events (30.4%), patient-care events (which were defined as events associated with nursing care, including falls and pressure ulcers) (15.0%), and health care-associated infections (11.9%). Conclusions: Adverse events were identified in nearly one in four admissions, and approximately one fourth of the events were preventable. These findings underscore the importance of patient safety and the need for continuing improvement. (Funded by the Controlled Risk Insurance Company and the Risk Management Foundation of the Harvard Medical Institutions.).
Analysis of adverse events in pediatric surgery using criteria validated from the adult population: justifying the need for pediatric-focused outcome measures

Samuel Rice-Townsend,Matthew Hall,Kathy J Jenkins,David W Roberson,Shawn J Rangel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.075

Abstract:Introduction: Little is known regarding the incidence and financial impact of adverse events associated with the surgical care of children. The purpose of this study was to characterize the epidemiology and resource utilization associated with these events using definitions validated from the adult population. Methods: We conducted a 6-year audit (Jan 2003-Dec 2008) of adverse events associated with the 100 most common general pediatric surgical procedures from the Pediatric Health Information System database. We audited 23 events as defined by the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project and modified Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Patient Safety Indicators. Excess length of stay and total hospital charges attributable to events were determined for each procedure after adjusting for confounders. Results: Overall 30-day incidence of any adverse event was 10.3% in our sample of 331,093 patients. The most common events were transfusions (30% of all events), wound complications (15%), and events associated with central access (11%). The cumulative incidence of serious events including cardiac arrest, stroke, deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolish was less than 0.3%. Ten procedures accounted for 62% of all events, and all 10 were associated with significant (P < .01) increases in length of stay and total hospital charges when any event occurred. Circumcisions, soft-tissue biopsies, pyloromyotomies, and repair of abdominal wall hernias accounted for only 3% of events despite comprising nearly 25% of operative volume. Conclusions: A relatively small number of pediatric surgical procedures contribute to a disproportionate share of adverse events. Although the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality criteria can identify pediatric procedures associated with a significant risk of morbidity, the relatively high 30-day event rates captured for some procedures may be heavily influenced by underlying co-morbidity profiles not related to the surgical disease or intervention. Furthermore, the validity of applying adult-focused "adverse" event definitions for the pediatric population should be further explored. Collaborative efforts will be needed to develop more clinically meaningful outcome measures for the purpose of quality improvement end points.
Is Quality and Completeness of Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Published in High Impact Radiology Journals Associated with Citation Rates?

Christian B. van der Pol,Matthew D. F. McInnes,William Petrcich,Adam S. Tunis,Ramez Hanna

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0119892

IF: 3.7

2015-03-16

PLoS ONE

Abstract:PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to determine whether study quality and completeness of reporting of systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) published in high impact factor (IF) radiology journals is associated with citation rates.METHODS: All SR and MA published in English between Jan 2007-Dec 2011, in radiology journals with an IF >2.75, were identified on Ovid MEDLINE. The Assessing the Methodologic Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist for study quality, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist for study completeness, was applied to each SR & MA. Each SR & MA was then searched in Google Scholar to yield a citation rate. Spearman correlation coefficients were used to assess the relationship between AMSTAR and PRISMA results with citation rate. Multivariate analyses were performed to account for the effect of journal IF and journal 5-year IF on correlation with citation rate. Values were reported as medians with interquartile range (IQR) provided.RESULTS: 129 studies from 11 journals were included (50 SR and 79 MA). Median AMSTAR result was 8.0/11 (IQR: 5-9) and median PRISMA result was 23.0/27 (IQR: 21-25). The median citation rate for SR & MA was 0.73 citations/month post-publication (IQR: 0.40-1.17). There was a positive correlation between both AMSTAR and PRISMA results and SR & MA citation rate; ρ=0.323 (P=0.0002) and ρ=0.327 (P=0.0002) respectively. Positive correlation persisted for AMSTAR and PRISMA results after journal IF was partialed out; ρ=0.243 (P=0.006) and ρ=0.256 (P=0.004), and after journal 5-year IF was partialed out; ρ=0.235 (P=0.008) and ρ=0.243 (P=0.006) respectively.CONCLUSION: There is a positive correlation between the quality and the completeness of a reported SR or MA with citation rate which persists when adjusted for journal IF and journal 5-year IF.

multidisciplinary sciences
Adverse event rates as measures of hospital performance.

Katharina Hauck,Xueyan Zhao,Terri Jackson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2011.06.010

IF: 3.255

2012-01-01

Health Policy

Abstract:Adverse event or complication rates are increasingly advocated as measures of hospital quality and performance. Objective of this study is to analyse patient-complexity adjusted adverse events rates to compare the performance of hospitals in Victoria, Australia. We use a unique hospital dataset that routinely records adverse events which arise during the admission. We identify hospitals with below or above average performance in comparison to their peers, and show for which types of hospitals risk adjusting makes biggest difference.We estimate adverse event rates for 87,790 elective and 43,771 emergency episodes in 34 public hospitals over the financial year 2005/06 with a complementary log-log model, using patient level administrative hospital data and controlling for patient complexity with a range of covariates.Teaching hospitals have average risk-adjusted adverse event rates of 24.3% for elective and 19.7% for emergency surgical patients. Suburban and rural hospitals have lower rates of 17.4% and 17%, and 16.1% and 15.7%, respectively. Selected non-teaching hospitals have relatively high rates, in particular hospitals in rural and socially disadvantaged areas. Risk adjustment makes a significant difference to most hospitals.We find comparably high adverse events rates for surgical patients in Australian hospitals, possibly because our data allow identification of a larger number of adverse events than data used in previous studies. There are marked variations in adverse event rates across hospitals in Victoria, even after risk adjusting. We discuss how policy makers could improve quality of care in Australian hospitals.
Are Reports of Randomized Controlled Trials Improving over Time? A Systematic Review of 284 Articles Published in High-Impact General and Specialized Medical Journals

Matthew J. To,Jennifer Jones,Mohamed Emara,Alejandro R. Jadad

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0084779

IF: 3.7

2013-12-31

PLoS ONE

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Inadequate reporting undermines findings of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This study assessed and compared articles published in high-impact general medical and specialized journals.METHODS: Reports of RCTs published in high-impact general and specialized medical journals were identified through a search of MEDLINE from January to March of 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2010. Articles that provided original data on adult patients diagnosed with chronic conditions were included in the study. Data on trial characteristics, reporting of allocation concealment, quality score, and the presence of a trial flow diagram were extracted independently by two reviewers, and discrepancies were resolved by consensus or independent adjudication. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative variables. Comparisons between general medical and specialized journals, and trends over time were performed using Chi-square tests.RESULTS: Reports of 284 trials were analyzed. There was a significantly higher proportion of RCTs published with adequate reporting of allocation concealment (p = 0.003), presentation of a trial flow diagram (p<0.0001) and high quality scores (p = 0.038) over time. Trials published in general medical journals had higher quality scores than those in specialized journals (p = 0.001), reported adequate allocation concealment more often (p = 0.013), and presented a trial flow diagram more often (p<0.001).INTERPRETATION: We found significant improvements in reporting quality of RCTs published in high-impact factor journals over the last fifteen years. These improvements are likely attributed to concerted international efforts to improve reporting quality such as CONSORT. There is still much room for improvement, especially among specialized journals.

multidisciplinary sciences
British Society of Interventional Radiology Iliac Artery Angioplasty-Stent Registry III

Raman Uberoi,Simon Milburn,Jon Moss,Peter Gaines on Behalf of the BIAS Registry Contributors,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-009-9634-3

2009-07-31

CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology

Abstract:The objective of this study was to audit current practice in iliac artery intervention in the United Kingdom. In 2001 the British Society of Interventional Radiology Iliac Artery Angioplasty-Stent (BIAS) III registry provided the first national database for iliac intervention. It recommended that data collection needed to continue in order to facilitate the dissemination of comparative data to individual units. BIAS III was designed to continue this work and has a simplified data set with an online submission form. Interventionalists were invited to complete a 3-page tick sheet for all iliac angioplasties and stents. Questions covered risk factors, procedural data, and outcome. Data for 2233 patients were submitted from 37 institutions over a 43-month period. Consultants performed 80% of the procedures, 62% of which were for claudication. Fifty-four percent of lesions were treated with stents and 25% of patients underwent bilateral intervention, resulting in a residual stenosis of <50% in 98%. Ninety-seven percent of procedures had no limb complication and there was a 98% inpatient survival rate. In conclusion, these figures provide an essential benchmark for both audit and patient information. National databases need to be expanded across the range of interventional procedures, and their collection made simple and, preferably, online.

radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging,cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Data quality assessment of interventional trials in public trial databases

Annabelle R Iken,Rudolf W Poolman,Maaike G J Gademan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111516

2024-09-05

Abstract:Objective: High-quality data entry in clinical trial databases is crucial to the usefulness, validity, and replicability of research findings, as it influences evidence-based medical practice and future research. Our aim is to assess the quality of self-reported data in trial registries and present practical and systematic methods for identifying and evaluating data quality. Study design and setting: We searched ClinicalTrials.Gov (CTG) for interventional total knee arthroplasty (TKA) trials between 2000 and 2015. We extracted required and optional trial information elements and used the CTG's variables' definitions. We performed a literature review on data quality reporting on frameworks, checklists, and overviews of irregularities in healthcare databases. We identified and assessed data quality attributes as follows: consistency, accuracy, completeness, and timeliness. Results: We included 816 interventional TKA trials. Data irregularities varied widely: 0%-100%. Inconsistency ranged from 0% to 36%, and most often nonrandomized labeled allocation was combined with a "single-group" assignment trial design. Inaccuracy ranged from 0% to 100%. Incompleteness ranged from 0% to 61%; 61% of finished TKA trials did not report their outcome. With regard to irregularities in timeliness, 49% of the trials were registered more than 3 months after the start date. Conclusion: We found significant variations in the data quality of registered clinical TKA trials. Trial sponsors should be committed to ensuring that the information they provide is reliable, consistent, up-to-date, transparent, and accurate. CTG's users need to be critical when drawing conclusions based on the registered data. We believe this awareness will increase well-informed decisions about published articles and treatment protocols, including replicating and improving trial designs.
Adverse Events in Robotic Surgery: A Retrospective Study of 14 Years of FDA Data

Homa Alemzadeh,Jaishankar Raman,Nancy Leveson,Zbigniew Kalbarczyk,Ravishankar K. Iyer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151470

IF: 3.7

2016-04-20

PLoS ONE

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Use of robotic systems for minimally invasive surgery has rapidly increased during the last decade. Understanding the causes of adverse events and their impact on patients in robot-assisted surgery will help improve systems and operational practices to avoid incidents in the future.METHODS: By developing an automated natural language processing tool, we performed a comprehensive analysis of the adverse events reported to the publicly available MAUDE database (maintained by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration) from 2000 to 2013. We determined the number of events reported per procedure and per surgical specialty, the most common types of device malfunctions and their impact on patients, and the potential causes for catastrophic events such as patient injuries and deaths.RESULTS: During the study period, 144 deaths (1.4% of the 10,624 reports), 1,391 patient injuries (13.1%), and 8,061 device malfunctions (75.9%) were reported. The numbers of injury and death events per procedure have stayed relatively constant (mean = 83.4, 95% confidence interval (CI), 74.2-92.7 per 100,000 procedures) over the years. Surgical specialties for which robots are extensively used, such as gynecology and urology, had lower numbers of injuries, deaths, and conversions per procedure than more complex surgeries, such as cardiothoracic and head and neck (106.3 vs. 232.9 per 100,000 procedures, Risk Ratio = 2.2, 95% CI, 1.9-2.6). Device and instrument malfunctions, such as falling of burnt/broken pieces of instruments into the patient (14.7%), electrical arcing of instruments (10.5%), unintended operation of instruments (8.6%), system errors (5%), and video/imaging problems (2.6%), constituted a major part of the reports. Device malfunctions impacted patients in terms of injuries or procedure interruptions. In 1,104 (10.4%) of all the events, the procedure was interrupted to restart the system (3.1%), to convert the procedure to non-robotic techniques (7.3%), or to reschedule it (2.5%).CONCLUSIONS: Despite widespread adoption of robotic systems for minimally invasive surgery in the U.S., a non-negligible number of technical difficulties and complications are still being experienced during procedures. Adoption of advanced techniques in design and operation of robotic surgical systems and enhanced mechanisms for adverse event reporting may reduce these preventable incidents in the future.

multidisciplinary sciences
Impact of Respiratory Compromise in Inpatient Interventional Radiology Procedures with Moderate Sedation in the United States

Richard D Urman,Marilyn Moucharite,Courtney Flynn,Ejegul Nuryyeva,Charles E Ray Jr

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019182455

IF: 19.7

Radiology

Abstract:Background Despite increased use of moderate sedation in interventional radiology (IR), patient reactions to moderate sedation are difficult to predict. The rate, risk factors, and burden of respiratory compromise in patients who undergo IR procedures with moderate sedation in the United States are poorly understood. Purpose To identify risk factors and quantify the clinical and economic burden of respiratory compromise in inpatient IR procedures in the United States. Materials and Methods Primary inpatient IR procedures with moderate sedation conducted from October 1, 2012, to September 30, 2015, were analyzed by using a retrospective claims database. Exclusions included age younger than 18 years, use of anesthesia, pre-existing cardiac or respiratory arrest, and respiratory failure. Respiratory compromise was defined as use of naloxone or flumazenil, nonmechanical or cardiopulmonary resuscitation, or endotracheal intubation on the day of the IR procedure. Propensity score matching was performed to risk adjust patients for cost and outcomes analysis, including hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, invasive mechanical ventilation, and death before hospital discharge. Results This study analyzed 525 151 patients (mean age, 60 years ± 17 [standard deviation]; 278 576 women). Respiratory compromise occurred in 1.0% (5235 of 525 151) of patients, predicted by long-term opioid therapy or active substance abuse (odds ratio [OR], 2.7; P < .001), age 65 years or older (OR, 1.4; P < .001), and sleep apnea (OR, 1.3; P < .001). Risk-adjusted patients with respiratory compromise compared with patients without respiratory compromise had $6904 higher costs (P < .001), 1.1-day longer hospital length of stay (P < .001), and higher rates of ICU admission (69.7% [3125 of 5235] vs 25.5% [1333 of 5235], respectively; P < .001), invasive mechanical ventilation (33.6% [1758 of 5235] vs 1.6% [85 of 5235], respectively; P < .001), and death (27.1% [1421 of 5235] vs 3.2% [166 of 5235], respectively; P < .001). Conclusion In the United States, respiratory compromise in interventional radiology procedures with moderate sedation contributes to worse clinical outcomes and higher costs. Respiratory compromise risk factors including long-term opioid therapy or active substance abuse, age 65 years or older, and sleep apnea should be preassessed and used to help guide intraprocedural monitoring to prevent respiratory compromise, improve patient outcomes, and reduce costs. © RSNA, 2019 See also the editorial by Rosen and Walz in this issue. Online supplemental material is available for this article.
Onsite serious adverse events reporting: Seven-year experience of the institutional ethics committee of a tertiary care hospital

Yashashri Chandrakant Shetty,Prajakta D Auti,Yashoda Ramachandra Aithal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.picr_213_23

Abstract:Background: Over the years, Indian regulations have undergone numerous amendments, including stringent reporting deadlines, relatedness requirements, and compensation obligations for serious adverse event (SAE). A historic change, new drugs and trial rules-2019, was proposed on March 19, 2019. The purpose of the study was to ascertain whether various stakeholders were reporting in accordance with the evolving SAE criteria. Materials and methods: Data were retrieved after the Ethics Committee's approval between August 2014 and December 2021. Data gathered before March 19, 2019, were categorized as "BEFORE" data, while the remaining data were categorized as "AFTER." Utilizing causality, on-site SAE reporting, and the ethics committee review procedure, we evaluated the compliance. The data were evaluated using descriptive statistics, and the Chi-square or Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare the "BEFORE" and "AFTER" groups. Results: A total of 77 SAEs were reported in 26 clinical trials, where most clinical trials were phase III. Endocrine projects made up 9/26 (34.61%). In the cardiology studies, the greatest SAE distribution was 21 SAEs/89 participants (23.59%) with approximately 48% of these being vascular. The "AFTER" group noticed a decrease in the total number and length of SAE subcommittee meetings. In the "AFTER" group, there was a significantly higher median number of agenda items/meetings (8 [4.5-10.75]) (P < 0.0001). The median interval between the onset of SAE and the first reporting date, however, was just 1 day (interquartile range: 1-5 days). In nondeath SAEs, there was no significant difference in the compensation paid. In the "AFTER" group, there were no discrepancies in reporting SAE. Conclusion: There is acceptable adherence to SAE reporting criteria.

Adverse Event Rates in Interventional Radiology: A Review of 30 Years of Societal Quality Improvement Publications

A 3-year review of MRI safety incidents within a UK independent sector provider of diagnostic services

Complications in Interventional Radiology: the role of clinical governance and iterative hospital systems in quality improvement

Trends in Medicare Reimbursement for Interventional Radiology Procedures: 2007-2020

Association between improved adenoma detection rates and interval colorectal cancer rates after a quality improvement program

Interventional radiology. A survey of staff, imaging equipment and procedures

Public Awareness of Interventional Radiology: Population-Based Analysis of the Current State of and Pathways for Improvement

Hospital-Based Quality Improvement Interventions for Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review

An overview of end arterial interventional radiology infectious complications

Abstract No. 575 Site of Service Practice Patterns for Interventional Radiologists and Advanced Practice Providers in Academic and Private Practices

Publication of quality improvement in medical oncology: A descriptive numerical summary from a scoping review.

The Safety of Inpatient Health Care

Analysis of adverse events in pediatric surgery using criteria validated from the adult population: justifying the need for pediatric-focused outcome measures

Is Quality and Completeness of Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Published in High Impact Radiology Journals Associated with Citation Rates?

Adverse event rates as measures of hospital performance.

Are Reports of Randomized Controlled Trials Improving over Time? A Systematic Review of 284 Articles Published in High-Impact General and Specialized Medical Journals

British Society of Interventional Radiology Iliac Artery Angioplasty-Stent Registry III

Data quality assessment of interventional trials in public trial databases

Adverse Events in Robotic Surgery: A Retrospective Study of 14 Years of FDA Data

Impact of Respiratory Compromise in Inpatient Interventional Radiology Procedures with Moderate Sedation in the United States

Onsite serious adverse events reporting: Seven-year experience of the institutional ethics committee of a tertiary care hospital