Purpose To recommend principles for including drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in clinical decision support. Methods A conference series was conducted to improve clinical decision support (CDS) for DDIs. The Content Workgroup met monthly by webinar from January 2013 to February 2014, with two in-person meetings to reach consensus. The workgroup consisted of 20 experts in pharmacology, drug information, and CDS from academia, government agencies, health information (IT) vendors, and healthcare organizations. Workgroup members addressed four key questions: (1) What process should be used to develop and maintain a standard set of DDIs?; (2) What information should be included in a knowledgebase of standard DDIs?; (3) Can/should a list of contraindicated drug pairs be established?; and (4) How can DDI alerts be more intelligently filtered? Results To develop and maintain a standard set of DDIs for CDS in the United States, we recommend a transparent, systematic, and evidence-driven process with graded recommendations by a consensus panel of experts and oversight by a national organization. We outline key DDI information needed to help guide clinician decision-making. We recommend judicious classification of DDIs as contraindicated, as only a small set of drug combinations are truly contraindicated. Finally, we recommend more research to identify methods to safely reduce repetitive and less relevant alerts. Conclusion A systematic ongoing process is necessary to select DDIs for alerting clinicians. We anticipate that our recommendations can lead to consistent and clinically relevant content for interruptive DDIs, and thus reduce alert fatigue and improve patient safety.

Triggers may be useful in identifying a narrow set of surgeries for further review to determine if a surgical AE occurred, complementing existing tools and initiatives used to detect AEs. Improved detection of AEs in outpatient surgery should help target potential areas for quality improvement.

The authors therefore propose a systematic methodology to develop trigger tools that takes into consideration previously published work, end-user preferences and expert opinion.

The explicit declaration in the landmark 1999 Institute of Medicine report “To Err Is Human” that, in the United States, 44,000 to 98,000 patients die each year as a consequence of “medical errors” gave widespread validation to the magnitude of the patient safety problem and catalyzed a number of U.S. federal government programs to measure and improve the safety of the national healthcare system. After more than 10 years, one of those federal programs, the Medicare Patient Safety Monitoring System (MPSMS), has reached a level of maturity and stability that has made it useful for the consistent measurement of the safety of inpatient care. The MPSMS is a chart review–based national patient safety surveillance system that provides rates of 21 specific hospital inpatient adverse event measures, which have been divided into 4 clinical domains (general, hospital-acquired infections, postprocedure adverse events, and adverse drug events) for analysis. The 2014 MPSMS national sample was drawn from 1109 hospitals and includes approximately 20,000 medical records of patients admitted to the hospital (all payors) for at least 1 of the 4 conditions of congestive heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, pneumonia, and major surgical procedures as defined by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Surgical Care Improvement Project. The MPSMS is now going through a major transformation to capture additional types of adverse events and is being redeveloped as the Quality and Safety Review System (QSRS). As an example of this transformation, QSRS will electronically import electronic data, which are standardized according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services billing definitions and will be updated and evolve over time to incorporate expanded standardized data available from electronic health records. This article reviews the development of MPSMS, the strengths and limitations of MPSMS, and expected future directions in patient safety measurement, focusing on those issues that are informing the development and implementation of QSRS.

No abstract