TY - JOUR
T1 - Emergency Department Adverse Events Detected Using the Emergency Department Trigger Tool
AU - Griffey, Richard T.
AU - Schneider, Ryan M.
AU - Todorov, Alexandre A.
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article as per ICMJE conflict of interest guidelines (see www.icmje.org ). The authors have stated that no such relationships exist. This work was supported by grants R18 HS025052-01 and R01 HS027811-01 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and grant #3767 from the Barnes Jewish Hospital Foundation . The contents of this work are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official view of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or the Barnes Jewish Hospital Foundation.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 American College of Emergency Physicians
PY - 2022/12
Y1 - 2022/12
N2 - Study objective: The Emergency Department Trigger Tool (EDTT) is a novel approach to adverse event detection in the ED. We previously described the derivation, validation, and high-level performance of this tool. Here we further detail adverse events detected to demonstrate the utility of the EDTT and how it might be used for quality improvement. Methods: This is a secondary analysis of data from a retrospective observational study. We ran the EDTT (a computerized query for triggers) on 13 months of ED visit data, reviewing 5,582 selected records using a typical 2-tiered trigger tool approach. The adverse events detected were categorized by place of occurrence (in the ED versus present on arrival), severity, omission/commission, and type using a taxonomy with categories, subcategories, and up to 3 cross-cutting modifiers. We present adverse event data in detail, focusing in turn on each of these descriptors (severity, event types, and cross-cutting themes) and highlight opportunities identified for targeted improvement. Results: We identified 458 adverse events occurring in the ED for a 13-month period, 10% of which required urgent intervention. Nearly all (90%) were acts of commission. Events resulting in harm were most often related to medications administered and patient care. Common cross-cutting event types included adverse events related to bleeding, opioids, and the use of propofol. Most adverse events (80%) led to temporary harm. Conclusion: The EDTT identifies a broad spectrum of adverse event types, allowing a review by severity, frequency, and type to better understand existing levels of harm in the ED and identify targets for quality improvement. A multicenter study of the EDTT is currently underway, which will contribute additional power and assess generalizability.
AB - Study objective: The Emergency Department Trigger Tool (EDTT) is a novel approach to adverse event detection in the ED. We previously described the derivation, validation, and high-level performance of this tool. Here we further detail adverse events detected to demonstrate the utility of the EDTT and how it might be used for quality improvement. Methods: This is a secondary analysis of data from a retrospective observational study. We ran the EDTT (a computerized query for triggers) on 13 months of ED visit data, reviewing 5,582 selected records using a typical 2-tiered trigger tool approach. The adverse events detected were categorized by place of occurrence (in the ED versus present on arrival), severity, omission/commission, and type using a taxonomy with categories, subcategories, and up to 3 cross-cutting modifiers. We present adverse event data in detail, focusing in turn on each of these descriptors (severity, event types, and cross-cutting themes) and highlight opportunities identified for targeted improvement. Results: We identified 458 adverse events occurring in the ED for a 13-month period, 10% of which required urgent intervention. Nearly all (90%) were acts of commission. Events resulting in harm were most often related to medications administered and patient care. Common cross-cutting event types included adverse events related to bleeding, opioids, and the use of propofol. Most adverse events (80%) led to temporary harm. Conclusion: The EDTT identifies a broad spectrum of adverse event types, allowing a review by severity, frequency, and type to better understand existing levels of harm in the ED and identify targets for quality improvement. A multicenter study of the EDTT is currently underway, which will contribute additional power and assess generalizability.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85135298818&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2022.05.037
DO - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2022.05.037
M3 - Article
C2 - 35927115
AN - SCOPUS:85135298818
SN - 0196-0644
VL - 80
SP - 528
EP - 538
JO - Annals of Emergency Medicine
JF - Annals of Emergency Medicine
IS - 6
ER -