Consensus building for development of outpatient adverse drug event triggers

Journal of Patient Safety

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 66-71

  Mull, Hillary J ^a,b   Nebeker, Jonathan R ^c,d   Shimada, Stephanie L ^b,e   Kaafarani, Haytham M A ^f   Rivard, Peter E ^g   Rosen, Amy K ^a,b  

^a VA BOSTON HEALTHCARE SYSTEM   (United States)

^b BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

^e VA Center of Excellence   (United States)

^f TUFTS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^g SUFFOLK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

adverse drug events; Delphi process; patient safety; trigger

Indexed keywords

AMBULATORY CARE; ARTICLE; CONSENSUS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; DELPHI STUDY; DRUG TOXICITY; HUMAN; MEDICATION ERROR; METHODOLOGY;

AMBULATORY CARE; CONSENSUS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, CLINICAL; DELPHI TECHNIQUE; DRUG TOXICITY; HUMANS; MEDICATION ERRORS;

EID: 79958020878     PISSN: 15498417     EISSN: 15498425     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PTS.0b013e31820c98ba     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Bates DW, Evans RS, Murff H, et al. Detecting adverse events using information technology. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2003;10:115-128. (Pubitemid 36397587)
2. Budnitz DS, Pollock DA, Weidenbach KN, et al. National surveillance of emergency department visits for outpatient adverse drug events. JAMA. 2006;296:1858-1866. (Pubitemid 44596195)
3. Classen DC, Pestotnik SL, Evans RS, et al. Computerized surveillance of adverse drug events in hospital patients. 1991. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14:221-225; discussion 225-226.
4. Resar RK, Rozich JD, Classen D. Methodology and rationale for the measurement of harm with trigger tools. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12(suppl 2): ii39-ii45. (Pubitemid 37542038)
5. Classen D, Lloyd RC, Provost L, et al. Development and evaluation of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Global Trigger Tool. J Patient Saf. 2008;4:169-177.
6. Gardner RM, Evans RS. Using computer technology to detect, measure, and prevent adverse drug events. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004;11:535-536. (Pubitemid 39421738)
7. Sharek PJ, Horbar JD, Mason W, et al. Adverse events in the neonatal intensive care unit: development, testing, and findings of an NICU-focused trigger tool to identify harm in North American NICUs. Pediatrics. 2006;118:1332-1340. (Pubitemid 46393776)
8. Szekendi MK, Sullivan C, Bobb A, et al. Active surveillance using electronic triggers to detect adverse events in hospitalized patients. Qual Saf Health Care. 2006;15:184-190.
9. Nebeker JR, Stoddard GJ, Rosen AK. Considering Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Value in Comparing the Performance of Triggers Systems for Iatrogenic Adverse Events. Triggers and Targeted Injury Detection Systems (TIDS) Expert Panel Meeting: Conference Summary.: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Rockville, MD; February 2009.
10. Cantor MN, Feldman HJ, Triola MM. Using trigger phrases to detect adverse drug reactions in ambulatory care notes. Qual Saf Health Care. 2007;16:132-134. (Pubitemid 46596452)
11. Thomsen LA, Winterstein AG, Sondergaard B, et al. Systematic review of the incidence and characteristics of preventable adverse drug events in ambulatory care. Ann Pharmacother. 2007;41:1411-1426. (Pubitemid 47311361)
12. Andrews JE, Pearce KA, Sydney C, et al. Current state of information technology use in a US primary care practice-based research network. Inform Prim Care. 2004;12:11-18. (Pubitemid 38647404)
13. Gandhi TK, Weingart SN, Borus J, et al. Adverse drug events in ambulatory care. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:1556-1564. (Pubitemid 36437933)
14. Honigman B, Lee J, Rothschild J, et al. Using computerized data to identify adverse drug events in outpatients. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001;8:254-266. (Pubitemid 32428753)
15. Mull HJ. Using Electronic Medical Records Data for Health Services Research Case Study: Development and Use of Ambulatory Adverse Event Trigger Tools. Paper presented at: Academy Health Annual Research Meeting 2010; Boston, MA.
16. Nebeker JR, Shimada SL. Definitions for Trigger Terminology. Triggers and Targeted Injury Detection Systems (TIDS) Expert Panel Meeting: Conference Summary: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Rockville, MD; February 2009.
17. Lederer J, Best D. Reduction in anticoagulation-related adverse drug events using a trigger-based methodology. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2005;31:313-318.
18. Kennerly D, Snow D, Rosen A, et al. Use of trigger tools to identify risks and hazards to patient safety. In: Classen D, ed. AHRQ 2010 Annual Conference. Bethesda, MD: AHRQ; 2010.
19. Mull HJ, Nebeker JR. Informatics tools for the development of action-oriented triggers for outpatient adverse drug events. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2008;505-509.
20. Fitch K, Bernstein SJ, Aguilar MS, et al. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User's Manual. Santa Monica: Rand Corp, 2001.
21. Jones J, Hunter D. Consensus methods for medical and health services research. BMJ. 1995;311:376-380.
22. Brook RH, Chassin MR, Fink A, et al. A method for the detailed assessment of the appropriateness of medical technologies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1986;2:53-63.
23. Black N, Murphy M, Lamping D, et al. Consensus development methods: a review of best practice in creating clinical guidelines. J Health Serv Res Policy. 1999;4:236-248. (Pubitemid 29473735)
24. Mull HJ, Shimada S, Nebeker JR, et al. A Review of the Trigger Literature: Adverse Events Targeted and Gaps in Detection: Triggers and Targeted Injury Detection Systems (TIDS) Expert Panel, Meeting: Conference Summary. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Rockville, MD. AHRQ Pub. No. 09-0003. February 2009;2009.
25. Shimada S, Rivard P, Nebeker J, et al. Priorities & Preferences of Potential Ambulatory Trigger Tool Users. Paper presented at: Academy Health Annual Research Meeting 2009; Chicago, IL.
26. Preston CC, Colman AM. Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2000;104:1-15.