Citations

Background Improving safety in healthcare has been paramount for decades, yet despite major attention and investment, improvement has remained incremental. Patient safety is a major concern in US healthcare, leading to significant harm and economic losses annually. Accurately identifying safety events remains difficult due to methodological discrepancies and lack of standardisation. This study evaluated the feasibility of implementing a standardised case-review methodology and safety-event taxonomy across diverse hospital settings to assess opportunities for improvement (OFIs) and compare findings with traditional definitions. Methods This multicentre retrospective cohort study reports data from 103 hospitals across the USA and Canada between 2016 and 2023. A multivariable logistic regression was performed to test case reviews for differences in the presence of one or more OFIs across several hospital types (bed size, academic status, urban setting, trauma level and Centres for Medicare and Medicaid Services overall star rating) and patient characteristics (age, gender, length of stay, admission and discharge code status and mortality). Results 19 181 cases were reviewed across the Learning Health System Collaborative, with a median of 107 reviews per hospital. Mortality was the most common cohort selection, studied by 91 hospitals (88%). At least one OFI was identified in 12 714 cases (66.3%). The logistic regression analysis found that all hospital characteristics and patient age, length of stay, code status and discharge disposition were significantly associated with at least one OFI. Of the 46 444 OFIs identified, 41 439 (89%) were from categories focused on omissions of care. The categories of end-of-life, documentation and treatment/care alone accounted for 25 980 OFIs (56%). Conclusion The highest volumes of safety-related OFIs were associated with omissions of care, as opposed to the traditional definition of patient safety, which primarily includes outcomes from acts of commission.

Importance The rise of novel, more infectious SARS-CoV-2 variants has made clear the need to rapidly deploy large-scale testing for COVID-19 to protect public health. However, testing remains limited due to shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE), naso- and oropharyngeal swabs, and healthcare workers. Simple test methods are needed to enhance COVID-19 screening. Here, we describe a simple, and inexpensive spit-test for COVID-19 screening called Patient Self-Collection of Sample-CoV2 (PSCS-CoV2). Objective To evaluate an affordable and convenient test for COVID-19. Methods The collection method relies on deep throat sputum (DTS) self-collected by the subject without the use of swabs, and was hence termed the Self-Collection of Sample for SARS-CoV-2 (abbreviated PSCS-CoV2). We used a phenol-chloroform extraction method for the viral RNA. We then tested for SARS-CoV-2 using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction with primers against at least two coding regions of the viral nucleocapsid protein (N1 and N2 or E) of SARS-CoV-2. We evaluted the sensitivity and specificity of our protocol. In addition we assess the limit of detection, and efficacy of our Viral Inactivating Solution. We also evaluated our protocol, and pooling strategy from volunteers on a local college campus. Results We show that the PSCS-CoV2 method accurately identified 42 confirmed COVID-19 positives, which were confirmed through the nasopharyngeal swabbing method of an FDA approved testing facility. For samples negative for COVID-19, we show that the cycle threshold for N1, N2, and RP are similar between the PSCS-CoV2 and nasopharynx swab collection method (n = 30). We found a sensitivity of 100% (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 92-100) and specifity of 100% (95% CI, 89-100) for our PSCS-CoV2 method. We determined our protocol has a limit of detection of 1/10,000 for DTS from a COVID-19 patient. In addition, we show field data of the PSCS-CoV2 method on a college campus. Ten of the twelve volunteers (N1 < 30) that we tested as positive were subsequently tested positive by an independent laboratory. Finally, we show proof of concept of a pooling strategy to test for COVID-19, and recommend pool sizes of four if the positivity rate is less than 15%. Conclusion and Relevance We developed a DTS-based protocol for COVID-19 testing with high sensitivity and specificity. This protocol can be used by non-debilitated adults without the assistance of another adult, or by non-debilitated children with the assistance of a parent or guardian. We also discuss pooling strategies based on estimated positivity rates to help conserve resources, time, and increase throughput. The PSCS-CoV2 method can be a key component of community-wide efforts to slow the spread of COVID-19.