Medical Error: System Solutions vs. Blame

Blame and Shame
Blame and Shame

“If you guys can’t think to order pregnancy tests, we’ve got big problems!” the consultant said.

He was a heart expert, but he remembered medical school:  women of childbearing age with abdominal pain and/or bleeding must have pregnancy tests.

We forget simple things, make simple cognitive errors, all the time.

Intelligence or experience will not protect you.

Every day brilliant people forget to:

  • close their zippers,
  • signal lane changes,
  • turn off the oven,
  • feed the cat,
  • lock the door

Medicine overflows with cognitive traps. It brims with safety-critical activity: you get only one chance to do something right or patients will suffer & die.

For example, a missed ectopic pregnancy can cause a woman to bleed to death.   An ectopic exists in 6-16% of women with pain and bleeding in the ED.  Every medical student learns early that ordering a pregnancy test can save lives.

But very rarely, blood-work gets ordered without a pregnancy test when providers are left to order lab tests separately.

The consultant believed emergency docs must be even more stupid than he suspected.  How could they miss something every medical student knows?

Uninformed individuals still blame people; experts tell us to blame the system.

Errors do not happen for lack of knowledge

We must improve the system and stop the ‘blame and shame’.

System solutions – 2 examples:

Behaviour-shaping constraints, or forcing functions.  For example, you cannot get your bank slip from a bank machine without collecting your bank card first; you cannot start your microwave without closing the door first; you can’t start your car without putting it into park. Constraints prevent medical mistakes.

Opt out vs. opt in: these terms get used in advertising and mailing lists.  To capture everyone for a list, advertisers put people on the list until they ask to be taken off.  Advertisers assume you want to be on the list, opt in is assumed, until you opt out.  (Opt out pops up in discussions about ways to increase organ donation)

Using opt out for lab panels for women of childbearing age with abdominal pain could decrease the chance of forgetting a pregnancy test.  Providers could opt out of performing the pregnancy test, but would be forced to think about it first.

Some still resist system solutions and try to blame people for medical errors.  What do you think?  Can we rely on system design to decrease error?

Quality in Healthcare, Patient Wait Times, & MD Arrogance

stopwatch

Physicians believe that:

 Anyone who delivers care in less time than me must be cutting corners and providing low quality care.  Same goes for clinics, hospitals, emergency departments…

Do physicians believe, then, that taking longer would improve quality?  Does more time equal more quality?

Deep down, many physicians believe that:

The highest quality care happens at precisely the speed at which I provide it, or could provide it, if I chose to work at my top speed.

This could just be physicians resisting change for their own reasons.  But I think there’s more…

Outcomes & Quality in Healthcare

Patients believe compassion equals quality, and rightly so: quality care must be compassionate.  

But patients also want great outcomes.  

Time determines outcome for most EM care (ICES Quality Report, 22 of 48 indicators are time based). 

Many papers show ways to decrease waste for patients: see articles on  LEAN and time in emergency care.  

EM associations teach ways to increase speed without decreasing quality (Physician Efficiency, Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine; Doing Things Faster Without Sacrificing Quality, ACEP), and many report ways to speed up care (Speed it up from Stanford 2013; ERs Move to Speed Care, WSJ 2011).

Time equals quality in emergency care.  There is no evidence that patient waiting or taking-a-long-time-to-provide-care equals quality.

Humility can help to improve performance.  Are we willing to look for ways to improve based on others’ success?

Medicare vs. Patient Care

i_love_medicare_stickerConference participants wore ‘I Love Medicare’ pins in Calgary.

Nietzsche might ask

Do you love medicare because patients benefit, or do you love medicare because you benefit?

Do you love ‘free care’ more than patient care?

People can care more about the idea of universal health care than they do about the care patients receive.

They deny data showing

long waits

poor patient outcomes

lack of access

lack of coordination

high cost

inefficiency

lack of control

provider frustration

Their solutions focus on

more control

more funding

more rationing

more cuts to salaries > 100k

more patient education to divert access

They would rather fight for a failed system than fight for improved patient care.

dog-ma-tism

n. An arrogant, stubborn assertion of opinion or belief

dog-ma-tism n.

1. positiveness in assertion of opinion especially when unwarranted or arrogant

2. a viewpoint or system of ideas based on insufficiently examined premises

Medicare dogmatism will guarantee mediocrity at best.

We need a system that:

puts patients’ needs first

makes patient experience central to funding

gives patients great access

offers patient choice

guarantees quality care (Quality should be a given)

demonstrates business excellence

attracts the best leaders

rewards great outcomes; not mediocrity

aligns incentives for every provider

rewards grass-roots provider innovation

gives control to health-care experts

This can happen in a publicly funded system, but it will never happen if people resist change.

We need to stop thinking that health-care is so special, complicated and unchangeable.

Do we love medicare more than patient care? Can we have an adult conversation about change?  What do you think?