PubMed · 16512585
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
K Al-Maghaslah. 2006. Make notes better with macros.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16512585/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiation treatment (RT) for cancer is susceptible to clinical incidents resulting from human errors and equipment failures. A systematic approach to collecting and processing incidents is required to manage patient risks. We describe the application of a new taxonomic structure for RT that supports risk analysis and organizational learning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic analysis of the RT process identified five process domains. Within each domain we defined incident type groups. We then constructed a database reflecting this taxonomic structure and populated it with incidents from publicly available sources. Querying this database provides insights into the nature and relative frequency of incidents in RT. RESULTS: There are relatively few reports of incidents in the Prescription domain compared with the Preparation and Treatment domains. There are also fewer reports of systematic and infrastructure incidents in comparison to sporadic and process incidents. Infrastructure incidents are mainly systematic in nature, while process incidents are more likely to be sporadic. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of a standard, systems-oriented framework for incident reporting makes it difficult to learn from existing incident report sources. A clear understanding of the potential consequences and relationships between different incident types will guide incident reporting, resource allocation, and risk management efforts.
This interim final rule with comment period amends Medicaid regulations to implement the provision of the Deficit Reduction Act that requires States to obtain satisfactory documentary evidence of an applicant's or recipient's citizenship and identity in order to receive Federal financial participation. This regulation provides States with guidance on the types of documentary evidence that may be accepted, including alternative forms of documentary evidence in addition to those described in the statute and the conditions under which this documentary evidence can be accepted to establish the applicant's declaration of citizenship. It also gives States guidance on the processes that may be used to help minimize the administrative burden on both States and applicants and recipients.
BACKGROUND: Continuity of care is required as patients move from the care of one pharmacist to another. The appropriate transfer of medication information between pharmacists as well as to patients at these times is essential in order to prevent drug-related problems (DRPs). OBJECTIVE: To develop a tool to transfer medication information between various pharmacists caring for the same patients. Secondary objectives were to evaluate the tool based on utility in practice and satisfaction of pharmacists. METHODS: The project consisted of a needs assessment involving in-depth interviews with patients and pharmacists and a literature review. These data were used to develop an optimal tool for medication information transfer between pharmacists in different practice settings. The tool was evaluated in a feasibility pilot for potential utility and pharmacist satisfaction. RESULTS: The tool created called EMITT (electronic medication information transfer tool) facilitates the communication of information to outpatient pharmacists including a letter and an up-to-date list of the patient's drugs. A total of 187 medication issues were communicated within 40 transferred letters, 61 of which required active follow-up, which potentially prevented 348 DRPs if the receiver of the information acted on the information that was provided. The 3 most common issues that required follow-up were restarting a held medication (n = 13), adjustment of doses based on laboratory results (n = 11), and starting a new indicated medication in the future (n = 7). CONCLUSIONS: A tool can be created to help address the gap in communication between pharmacists when patients move between interfaces of care by evaluating the needs of healthcare professionals involved in the information transfer process. It is envisioned that the elements of our tool can be easily adapted to other institutions to improve medication information transfer.