Showing posts with label medical mishaps. Show all posts
Showing posts with label medical mishaps. Show all posts

Sunday, June 14, 2015

Hospitals still use flawed secrecy law to review medical errors

As the government drags its heels over amending the health secrecy act, hundreds of critical care incidents are still being investigated under the flawed legislation, the Star has learned.

Hospitals continue to invoke a controversial health secrecy law when they investigate critical medical errors, despite a government report that in March highlighted serious flaws in the legislation.

In the past week, the Star has surveyed 15 hospitals in the GTA and found more than 200 critical or severe incidents had been handled under the act since April 2014 — most of those while the legislation was under active review by the province. This includes at least 11 patient deaths...

 

 

Monday, January 26, 2015

Transparency about medical errors a ‘magic bullet’ that could help make heath care safer: report

| | Last Updated: Jan 24 3:03 PM ET
More from Albert Quon
An x-ray shows a surgical instrument that was left inside a patient's  body after surgery.  Research suggests that about 70,000 patients a year experience preventable, serious injury as a result of treatments in Canada.
Improving transparency around medical error is a potential “magic bullet” that could finally start to make health care less hazardous after years of lacklustre efforts, concludes a new report from a major American patient-safety organization.
Increasing openness would bring “powerful effects” and cost relatively little to implement, the National Patient Safety Foundation report argues.
NP
Among the institute’s 39 recommendations is for health care institutions to create a culture where transparency is rewarded and failing to speak up brings “consequences”; informing all patients about their clinician’s experience, outcomes and disciplinary history; and requiring that hospitals and other facilities publicly report on their performance.

“If transparency were a drug, it would likely be a blockbuster, given the evidence of its effectiveness and its enthusiastic endorsements from key stakeholders,” said the organization. “How can patients fully trust the clinicians and organizations from which they receive care if these clinicians and organizations are not fully transparent?”

The report from the foundation’s Lucian Leape Institute was released this week, as a National Post series revealed that most of the thousands of cases of serious medical error estimated to occur in Canadian hospitals every year go unreported even within the facilities. And less information about those mishaps is divulged publicly.

Four provinces release no data at all, most of the rest provide only limited statistics. Manitoba alone releases any detail — in the form of terse, one-line descriptions — on specific incidents.

The foundation notes that, if anything, the rate of medical error has grown worse since the U.S. Institute of Medicine first published a study 15 years ago estimating the extent of the problem.

It was followed in Canada in 2004 with a study that estimated about 70,000 preventable, serious adverse events occur in acute-care hospitals annually, with 9,000 to 23,000 patients dying because of avoidable errors.

Efforts to fix the problem, including education programs, computerization, changes to organizational culture and root-cause analysis, have had limited impact, says the American report, called Shining a Light.

But exposing the system to further scrutiny – “the free, uninhibited flow of information that is open to the scrutiny of others” — could make a real difference, it argues.
“We believe the missing ingredient, the essential element needed to enable the operational and culture changes to occur, is transparency,” said the institute. “Patients have a right to full information about every aspect of their care. Without it, optimal care is an elusive dream.”

Research suggests that releasing information about the outcomes of health care leads to better practices, the report said, and is more effective than, say, offering incentive payments for good performance, an increasingly popular concept in Canada.

The report warned, however, there are many barriers to increased openness, such as fear of harm to reputation, livelihood or pride; and the desire of some players in the system to maintain the status quo and “resist the sharing of information.”

But deliberate withholding of information puts patients at risk and represents a “moral failure,” the report said.
National Post
• Email: tblackwell@nationalpost.com | Twitter:

Source: http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/01/22/transparency-about-medical-errors-a-magic-bullet-that-could-help-make-heath-care-safer-report/
 

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

Infected and undocumented: Thousands of Canadians dying from hospital-acquired bugs

| | Last Updated: Jan 20 9:24 AM ET
More from Tom Blackwell | @tomblackwellNP

Brenda Dyck, the sister in-law of Kim Smith holds her portrait as her father, Gord Smith and brother Trevor Smith look on in her Winnipeg, Manitoba home. Kim Smith, went to hospital last year for an elective hysterectomy, the surgical wound became infected and she ended up dying in agony days later from necrotizing fasciitis - flesh eating disease.

Kim Smith was no stranger to stress — her job in community corrections often brought her face to face with members of Winnipeg’s violent street gangs.
But as she lay in a local hospital’s gynecology ward more than a year ago, nurses called her brother with an unusual question: Did Kim suffer from any kind of emotional troubles?


The woman, her caregivers said, had been telling them she wanted to kill herself.
It was a shocking turn of events, coming a week after Ms. Smith entered St. Boniface Hospital for a routine hysterectomy and ovary removal. In the days since the operation, however, she had been complaining of escalating pain in her gut, so intense she began to fear for her life — and then apparently wanted to end it.

By the time medical staff took the woman’s complaints seriously, an infection inside her belly had developed into necrotizing fasciitis (flesh-eating disease) and devoured large chunks of her abdomen.

Within hours of emergency surgery to drain “brown, foul-smelling liquid” and excise dead tissue, and four days after her 45th birthday, Ms. Smith was dead.
“She kept yelling at me, ‘I know my body, I know there’s something wrong in my stomach and nobody wants to listen to me. And I’m going to end up dying here,’ ” said Brenda Dyck, her sister-in-law. “She died the most horrible, painful death anybody could suffer, and nobody would listen to her and reach out to her.”
Ms. Smith’s tragic demise was more dramatic than many cases of hospital-acquired infection (HAI).  Necrotizing fasciitis is a frightening, but rare, complication. Still, about 8,000 Canadians a year die from bugs they contract in facilities meant to make them better, while many more see their hospital stay prolonged by such illness.

Yet after years of well-intentioned work and millions of dollars spent on combatting the scourge, the details and extent of the problem remain murky.
No national statistics, for instance, document the number of surgical-wound infections like Ms. Smith’s, one of the most common types of hospital-acquired pathogens.

A federal agency now publishes rates of sepsis, or blood infection, at individual hospitals, but their methodological value is a matter of debate. Government tracking of worrisome, drug-resistant bacteria is patchy and of questionable practical use, say infectious-disease physicians.

“There is no question that at a national level, both our surveillance for hospital-acquired infection and our surveillance for anti-microbial resistance is not serving our needs,” said Allison McGeer, an infectious-disease specialist at Toronto’s Mount Sinai Hospital. “[And] we know, very substantially, that you can’t fix what you’re not measuring.”

Meanwhile, important lessons about how diseases spread inadvertently within health facilities often come to light in fits and start.

Two hospitals in Toronto and one in Quebec, for instance, announced independently in the late 2000s that they had discovered contaminated sinks were the source of separate, deadly outbreaks of infection.

Some word of the episodes got out through specialized medical journal articles, academic conferences and sporadic news stories. But there is no systematic way of disseminating such information across the system, said Darrell Horn, a former patient-safety investigator for the Winnipeg Region Health Authority.
“It’s just totally loosey-goosey,” he said.
You could sit and call every hospital in the country, and ask them when was the last time they cleaned the sink in the [neonatal intensive care unit] and how they cleaned it, and you’d get nothing but blank stares
“You could sit and call every hospital in the country, and ask them when was the last time they cleaned the sink in the [neonatal intensive care unit] and how they cleaned it, and you’d get nothing but blank stares.”

Handout
 
 
Health care is paying much more attention, at least, to the HAI problem than it did a decade ago, said Dr. Michael Gardam, infection-control director at Toronto’s University Health Network.

Following heavy media coverage of the mostly hospital-based SARS outbreak and numerous deadly hospital infestations of C. difficile, facilities started hiring more experts, encouraging hand-washing and generally striving to prevent infection – rather than just treat it after the fact as an unavoidable cost of doing medical business.

Dr. Gardam’s hospitals have even begun characterizing hospital-acquired infections as adverse events, akin to more traditional medical error.
Whether because of such measures or not, Ms. Smith had few fears when she entered St. Boniface on Sept. 30, 2013, for an operation for uterine fibroids, her family says.

She likely did not know that most surgical-wound infections arise from bacteria patients carry into hospital on their skin, which can then sneak inside through incisions, especially when infection-control safeguards are not optimum.

As early as the day after her operation, the Métis woman began to complain of pain in her abdomen, only to be told by nurses that she simply needed to walk about, Ms. Dyck recalls.

Some of that suffering is reflected in her patient charts, obtained by the family and provided to the National Post.

On Oct. 1, she complained of gastrointestinal bloating and discomfort; the following day, heartburn, bloating and slight nausea, the records note.
On Oct. 3, the chart refers to her feeling unwell and weak, then projectile vomiting. The next day, she had “lots of gas pains,” and the day after that abdominal pain “controlled with PO” (prescription opioids).
Finally, early on Oct. 6, came the call about her self-destructive thoughts.
“Nurse found her confused, half-naked, pulled her IV out anxious. Saying she is at her end and is suicidal,” the chart said. A later notation suggested anxiety was prolonging her recovery and the sedative Ativan was administered.

Then, sitting at her side 12 hours later, her brother Trevor Smith noticed a strange purple discolouring of his sister’s feet, the kind of “mottling” that can be a sign of imminent death, and raised the alarm.

Lyle Stafford for National Post

Ms. Smith was soon being wheeled into the operating room, where the surgeons who opened her up first observed “a large effluent of brown, foul-smelling liquid from the abdominal cavity.” They removed several abscesses, drained the liquid, then discovered the worst — necrotizing fasciitis expanding through the peritoneum (the lining of the abdomen) and abdominal muscles.

St. Boniface declined to comment on the case, saying it was prevented from doing so by provincial legislation. But Ms. Dyck said one doctor told her staff had likely not adequately disinfected her sister-in-law’s stomach before the hysterectomy, ensuring any bacteria that came with her into the operating room stayed on the outside.

medical-errors-

While not every surgical infection is preventable, “they can be dramatically minimized” with well-documented precautions, Dr. Gardam says.

If hospital infections are at least sometimes preventable, to what extent is the problem being monitored and how much of that information becomes public?
Some provinces, such as Ontario and British Columbia, require hospitals to report to the government on a few common infections, such as C. difficile, blood infections transmitted by the “central lines” used to access major blood vessels, and pneumonia from ventilator use. Ontario hospitals must report their compliance with tactics designed to prevent surgical infections, though not the infections themselves.

Experts debate whether publicly reporting data actually benefits health care, but a 2012 study found that C. difficile rates in Ontario hospitals dropped by 25% after the province started divulging statistics on the disease.

Many provinces, though, have no such requirements, and the national picture is hazy. The Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) reports rates of sepsis, and stats that indirectly address infection, such as the rate of death and re-admission to hospital following some procedures.

Some infectious-disease specialists, though, are unimpressed by its infection numbers, obtained by analyzing hospital records after the fact.

“Garbage in, garbage out,” Dr. McGeer said of the figures. “You cannot count infections using CIHI data, and CIHI knows that.”

What is needed to paint an accurate picture is experts at each hospital reporting “true cases,” she says.

That is the goal of the Public Health Agency of Canada’s Nosocomial Infection Surveillance Program, arguably the country’s premiere example of transparency on the diseases that health care gives its patients.

The program’s focus is drug-resistant bacteria, the increasingly familiar methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE) and C. difficile. It is based, though, on a sampling of just 57 teaching hospitals, a fraction of the country’s 250 or so acute-care hospitals. The SARS outbreak, for instance, erupted at a community hospital that is not part of that network.

Infectious-disease doctors have long complained that it takes too long for the data those hospitals submit to the Agency to be posted.

Lyle Stafford for National Post

“If I want to know what’s happening with MRSA, I call my friends,” said Dr. McGeer.

More complete, and easier to access, is the system developed by the European Centre for Disease Control, says Lynora Saxinger, an infectious-disease specialist at the University of Alberta. It not only tracks drug-resistant bugs, but matches those stats with the use — or possible over-use — of antibiotics, considered the main cause of the problem.

The latest concern of infectious-disease specialists is a class of antibiotic-defeating organisms known as carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriacaeae (CRE), a “game changer,” said Dr. Saxinger. The death rate is as high as 50%.
CRE is part of the public health agency’s surveillance system, meaning those 57 hospitals submit their numbers, but Dr. McGeer said all acute-care hospitals in Canada should have to report them.

Meanwhile, “the last CRE outbreak … I heard about it on the news,” said Dr. Saxinger.

There is no evidence Ms. Smith was infected with a drug-resistant organism, but by the time she went in for emergency surgery, it appears little could have saved her. Indeed, once begun, necrotizing fasciitis has a 70% death rate.
Early the next morning, her blood pressure had sunk, the tell-tale black of more dead tissue had spread around her side to her back and she went into cardiac arrest, dying minutes later.

The hospital investigated the incident and assured the family that lessons learned from it would be passed on to staff — and help future patients, says Ms. Dyck. Mr. Horn says his experience across Canada suggests it is unlikely those lessons will be shared with anyone else in the health-care system, or the public.
Meanwhile, Ms. Dyck says the sight of doctors and nurses fruitlessly attempting to revive her sister-in-law — her abdomen left open as part of the flesh-eating treatment — remains etched in her mind, as is the thought it might all have been prevented.

“What I witnessed, I was traumatized by for months and months,” she said.
“It was just a terrible, terrible, painful death. And she knew she was going to die, that’s the worst thing.”

National Post
• Email: tblackwell@nationalpost.com | Twitter:

Source: http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/01/19/infected-and-undocumented-thousands-of-canadians-dying-from-hospital-acquired-bugs/
 

Inside Canada’s secret world of medical error: ‘There is a lot of lying, there’s a lot of cover-up’

| | Last Updated: Jan 19 5:16 PM ET
More from Tom Blackwell | @tomblackwellNP



As Helen Church woke up one morning just before Christmas 2012, the pain that had been building for weeks behind her right eye reached an excruciating climax.

Screaming in agony, she ran around her east-end Toronto apartment before finally managing to call 911 and passing out.

For the second time in short succession, she had fallen victim to health care gone badly awry.

Just two years earlier, Ms. Church went to a nearby hospital to have an ovary removed as treatment for a painful cyst. She left hours later with the ovary still in place — and a piece of mesh embedded in her abdomen to repair a non-existent hernia.

Then, months later, a specialist replaced an artificial, cataract-correcting lens that he said had started to wear. The result: That eye was now blind and growing increasingly painful.

The ophthalmologist, another specialist told her later, had implanted the lens in the wrong position, obscuring her sight and puncturing a duct, causing a slow bleed and massive pressure.

“There was so much blood in there, it blew the eyeball out of my head. It was hanging on my cheek,” said Ms. Church, a razor-sharp 83-year-old. “The blood was just dripping everywhere … I was hysterical, the pain was so bad.”

Both incidents point to dangerous breakdowns in the Canadian health-care system. But don’t expect to find any public record of either apparent blunder — or of thousands of similarly harmful and sometimes deadly mistakes that occur in facilities across the country each year.

Most instances of the system hurting rather than healing patients, in fact, are not even reported by staff internally, a National Post investigation has documented.

Research suggests that about 70,000 patients a year experience preventable, serious injury as a result of treatments. More shocking, a landmark study published a decade ago estimated that as many as 23,000 Canadian adults die annually because of preventable “adverse events” in acute-care hospitals alone.
The rate of errors may be even higher today, some evidence suggests, despite the millions of dollars spent on much-touted patient-safety efforts.

Yet a tiny fraction of those cases are publicly acknowledged and usually only in the form of antiseptic statistics. For most serious treatment gaffes, not even the sparsest of details is revealed, making the vast problem all but invisible.

The Post has also learned there is no routine, public documentation of one common source of health-care harm — malfunctioning medical devices linked to dozens of deaths and hundreds of serious injuries every year.

“Learnings from these things, even when a good investigation is done, are going into black holes,” said Darrell Horn, a “critical-incident” investigator who spent several years with the Winnipeg Region Health Authority. “They’ve created this perfect, invisible box to put everything in.”

Manitoba is actually a rare exception to the opaqueness that shrouds medical error in Canada; single-line descriptions the province has released for the last three years offer at least a snapshot of what calamities can befall patients.
Among the 100 cases reported in the three months ending Sept. 30, 2013, was that of a new mother who had a heart attack after staff inadvertently gave her a blood-pressure-increasing medication, instead of a nausea antidote following a caesarean section.

Another patient, known to be at risk for blood clots, suffered a fatal cardiac arrest when staff neglected to provide preventive treatment after surgery.
A woman needed a second operation after an X-ray revealed a screw from a broken clamp had been left inside her during a C-section.

And, without further explanation, one patient “underwent unnecessary open-lung biopsy.”

For the rest of the country, such cases occur in a vacuum, most not reported at all and virtually none described with any kind of narrative.

In fact, legislation in most provinces bars information on adverse events being released to malpractice plaintiffs or publicly divulged under freedom-of-information acts. The laws are designed — with limited success — to encourage internal reporting of mistakes.

A health-care culture still straitjacketed by an old-fashioned hierarchy, fear of legal action and a focus on punishment rather than learning from mistakes also keeps missteps bottled up, say health workers and safety experts.

A nurse at an Ontario hospital, who asked not to be identified for fear of repercussions, said she works with two surgeons whose skills are so lacking, “I wouldn’t even want them to touch my dog.”

She filed an anonymous complaint against one several years ago, but little changed. Now, she stays mum about problems ranging from high rates of post-op infections to surgeries frequently needing re-dos.

“We do turn a blind eye and walk away,” the nurse admitted. “There is a lot of lying, there’s a lot of cover-up, which turns my stomach.”

By contrast, preventable injury and deaths in many other arenas — from homicides to industrial accidents and road crashes — are routinely divulged by police or other authorities.
There is a lot of lying, there’s a lot of cover-up, which turns my stomach
The starkest counterpoint to health care’s lack of transparency around error, however, is offered by the aviation industry.

On the way to dramatically improving the safety of flying, the sector has become conspicuously open about its mishaps. Canada’s Transportation Safety Board, for instance, posts details online of current investigations into everything from actual crashes to ground vehicles inadvertently driving across airport runways.
The constant, transparent exchange of safety information not only helps curb accidents, but enhances passengers’ confidence in the industry, says John Pottinger, an aviation-safety consultant and former Transport Canada official.
“Where the public even thinks it is being deceived or doesn’t have the whole story, then right away we get suspicious,” he said.


Source: