Herasevich, Svetlana

Objectives Diagnostic error and delay is a prevalent and impactful problem. This study was part of a mixed-methods approach to understand the organizational, clinician, and patient factors contributing to diagnostic error and delay among acutely ill patients within a health system, as well as recommendations for the development of tailored, targeted, feasible, and effective interventions. Methods We did a multisite qualitative study using focus group methodology to explore the perspectives of key clinician stakeholders. We used a conceptual framework that characterized diagnostic error and delay as occurring within 1 of 3 stages of the patient’s diagnostic journey—critical information gathering, synthesis of key information, and decision making and communication. We developed our moderator guide based on the sociotechnical frameworks previously described by Holden and Singh for understanding noncognitive factors that lead to diagnostic error and delay. Deidentified focus group transcripts were coded in triplicate and to consensus over a series of meetings. A final coded data set was then uploaded into NVivo software. The data were then analyzed to generate overarching themes and categories. Results We recruited a total of 64 participants across 4 sites from emergency departments, hospital floor, and intensive care unit settings into 11 focus groups. Clinicians perceive that diverse organizational, communication and coordination, individual clinician, and patient factors interact to impede the process of making timely and accurate diagnoses. Conclusions This study highlights the complex sociotechnical system within which individual clinicians operate and the contributions of systems, processes, and institutional factors to diagnostic error and delay.

Abstract Rationale Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common complication after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) and is a major contributor to nonrelapse mortality. Objectives To better understand pretransplant risk factors for developing ARDS after HCT. Methods This is a single-center observational study comparing risk factors for ARDS development in 164 patients who went on to develop post-HCT ARDS compared with 492 patients who did not. The patients were matched 1 to 3 on age, sex, type of transplant (allogeneic vs. autologous), and underlying disease. Pertinent risk factors were analyzed separately in multivariable conditional logistic regression after adjustment for a priori variables known to be associated with ARDS development. Results Patients with ARDS were more likely to have a lower pretransplant pulmonary function as measured by forced vital capacity (FVC) (odds ratio [OR], 0.54 [0.42–0.70] per liter increase in FVC; P < 0.001), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) (OR, 0.52 [0.38–0.71] per liter increase in FEV1; P < 0.001) and diffusing capacity (OR, 0.92 [0.88–0.96] per ml/min/mm Hg increase in diffusing capacity; P < 0.001). Several laboratory indices were predictive of subsequent ARDS development including elevated AST (aspartate aminotransferase) (OR, 1.01 [1.00–1.01]; P < 0.008), lower serum albumin (OR, 0.44 [0.30–0.66]; P < 0.001), lower pretransplant hemoglobin (OR, 0.82 [0.73–0.92]; P = 0.001), and lower leukocyte count (OR, 0.88 [0.79–0.99]; P < 0.03). Patients who went on to develop ARDS were more likely to have been hospitalized in the year before the transplant (OR, 1.11 [1.04–1.20]; P = 0.003), and required invasive or noninvasive ventilation during that hospitalization. Lastly, patients with ARDS were significantly more likely to have received carboplatin, thalidomide, methotrexate, and cisplatin than the non-ARDS control subjects. Conclusions Several risk factors for developing ARDS after HCT are identifiable at the time of transplantation, well before the development of critical illness and ARDS. The identification of risk factors long before ARDS develops is relatively unique to the HCT population. Further work is needed to develop usable risk prediction tools in this setting.

AbstractAcute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains an important clinical entity in the intensive care unit with a significant impact on morbidity and mortality. Effective therapeutic interventions are limited; thus current research focus has shifted from treatment to the prevention of this pulmonary syndrome. In recent decades, a decrease in the incidence of ARDS has been observed and this reduction is largely due to preventive strategies including safe lung ventilation practices, avoidance of iatrogenic exposures, and improvement in care of predisposing conditions such as sepsis and pneumonia. Early identification of at-risk patients, prompt treatment of predisposing conditions, and adoption of evidence-based best practice including restrictive transfusion strategies, conservative fluid management, avoidance of large tidal volume ventilation, and aspiration precaution practices are key preventive strategies with demonstrated benefits. There are currently no effective pharmacological preventive strategies for ARDS.