Cross-Checking between ED Physicians Reduces Harm
|
By HospiMedica International staff writers Posted on 08 May 2018 |

Image: A new study suggests a few minutes of consultation can avoid adverse ED events (Photo courtesy of Dreamstime).
A new study suggests that systematic cross-checking between doctors may be a key to reducing the high rate of adverse events in the emergency department (ED).
Researchers at the Sorbonne University (Paris, France), Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital (Paris, France), and other institutions conducted a cluster randomized crossover trial that included a random sample of 1,680 patients attended to in six EDs in France during two 10-day periods. The intervention included systematic cross-checking between ED physicians three times a day, which included a brief presentation of one physician’s case to another, followed by the second physician’s feedback. The main outcome was medical error, defined as either a near miss or a serious adverse event.
The results showed that there were 54 adverse events among 840 patients (6.4%) during the cross-check intervention, compared with 90 adverse events among 840 patients (10.7%) during the control period, a relative reduction of 40%. Most of the reductions occurred in adverse events defined as near misses, with a reduction of 47%. Errors in sepsis management accounted for more than 40% of the preventable serious adverse events. The median duration of cross-checking sessions was nine minutes, during which about seven patients were discussed. The study was published on April 23, 2018, in JAMA Internal Medicine.
“The reduction in preventable serious adverse events with systematic cross-checking did not reach statistical significance; only reductions in near misses did,” explained lead author Yonathan Freund, MD, PhD, of Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière. “Whether an adverse event resulted from a misdiagnosis or from the implementation of an inappropriate plan for the correct diagnosis could not be determined decisively. This included sepsis-associated medical errors, which may be particularly relevant, because the most commonly occurring serious adverse events were violations of the surviving sepsis campaign guidelines.”
An adverse event is defined as a preventable or non-preventable injury that was caused by medical management (rather than the underlying disease) and that prolonged hospitalization, produced a disability at the time of discharge, or both. Adverse event also include errors, defined as acts of commission or omission leading to an undesirable outcome or significant potential for such an outcome, and near misses, in which an error was committed, but the patient did not experience clinical harm, either through early detection or sheer luck.
Related Links:
Sorbonne University
Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital
Researchers at the Sorbonne University (Paris, France), Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital (Paris, France), and other institutions conducted a cluster randomized crossover trial that included a random sample of 1,680 patients attended to in six EDs in France during two 10-day periods. The intervention included systematic cross-checking between ED physicians three times a day, which included a brief presentation of one physician’s case to another, followed by the second physician’s feedback. The main outcome was medical error, defined as either a near miss or a serious adverse event.
The results showed that there were 54 adverse events among 840 patients (6.4%) during the cross-check intervention, compared with 90 adverse events among 840 patients (10.7%) during the control period, a relative reduction of 40%. Most of the reductions occurred in adverse events defined as near misses, with a reduction of 47%. Errors in sepsis management accounted for more than 40% of the preventable serious adverse events. The median duration of cross-checking sessions was nine minutes, during which about seven patients were discussed. The study was published on April 23, 2018, in JAMA Internal Medicine.
“The reduction in preventable serious adverse events with systematic cross-checking did not reach statistical significance; only reductions in near misses did,” explained lead author Yonathan Freund, MD, PhD, of Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière. “Whether an adverse event resulted from a misdiagnosis or from the implementation of an inappropriate plan for the correct diagnosis could not be determined decisively. This included sepsis-associated medical errors, which may be particularly relevant, because the most commonly occurring serious adverse events were violations of the surviving sepsis campaign guidelines.”
An adverse event is defined as a preventable or non-preventable injury that was caused by medical management (rather than the underlying disease) and that prolonged hospitalization, produced a disability at the time of discharge, or both. Adverse event also include errors, defined as acts of commission or omission leading to an undesirable outcome or significant potential for such an outcome, and near misses, in which an error was committed, but the patient did not experience clinical harm, either through early detection or sheer luck.
Related Links:
Sorbonne University
Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital
Latest Critical Care News
- Automated IV Labeling Solution Improves Infusion Safety and Efficiency
- First-Of-Its-Kind AI Tool Detects Pulmonary Hypertension from Standard ECGs
- 4D Digital Twin Heart Model Improves CRT Outcomes
- AI Turns Glucose Data Into Actionable Insights for Diabetes Care
- Microscale Wireless Implant Tracks Brain Activity Over Time
- Smart Mask Delivers Continuous, Battery-Free Breath Monitoring
- Routine Blood Pressure Readings May Identify Risk of Future Cognitive Decline
- CGM-Based Algorithm Enhances Insulin Dose Adjustment in Type 2 Diabetes
- Fish Scale–Based Implants Offer New Approach to Corneal Repair
- Dual-Function Wound Patch Combines Infection Sensing and Treatment
- Smartwatch Signals and Blood Tests Team Up for Early Warning on Insulin Resistance
- Smart Fabric Technology Aims to Prevent Pressure Injuries in Hospital Care
- Standardized Treatment Algorithm Improves Blood Pressure Control
- Combined Infection Control Strategy Limits Drug-Resistant Outbreak in NICU
- AI Helps Predict Which Heart-Failure Patients Will Worsen Within a Year
- Algorithm Allows Paramedics to Predict Brain Damage Risk After Cardiac Arrest
Channels
Artificial Intelligence
view channel
Machine Learning Approach Enhances Liver Cancer Risk Stratification
Hepatocellular carcinoma, the most common form of primary liver cancer, is often detected late despite targeted surveillance programs. Current screening guidelines emphasize patients with known cirrhosis,... Read more
New AI Approach Monitors Brain Health Using Passive Wearable Data
Brain health spans cognitive and emotional functions and can fluctuate even in adults without diagnosed disease. Detecting early changes remains difficult in routine care and burdens specialty services... Read moreSurgical Techniques
view channel
Continuous Monitoring with Wearables Enhances Postoperative Patient Safety
Postoperative hypoxemia on general surgical wards is common and often missed by intermittent vital sign checks. Undetected low oxygen levels can delay recovery and raise the risk of complications that... Read more
New Approach Enables Customized Muscle Tissue Without Biomaterial Scaffolds
Volumetric muscle loss is a traumatic loss of skeletal muscle that often leads to permanent functional impairment and limited reconstructive options. Current experimental strategies struggle to deliver... Read morePatient Care
view channel
Wearable Sleep Data Predict Adherence to Pulmonary Rehabilitation
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a long-term lung disorder that makes breathing difficult and often disturbs sleep, reducing energy for daily activities. Limited engagement in pulmonary... Read more
Revolutionary Automatic IV-Line Flushing Device to Enhance Infusion Care
More than 80% of in-hospital patients receive intravenous (IV) therapy. Every dose of IV medicine delivered in a small volume (<250 mL) infusion bag should be followed by subsequent flushing to ensure... Read moreHealth IT
view channel
EMR-Based Tool Predicts Graft Failure After Kidney Transplant
Kidney transplantation offers patients with end-stage kidney disease longer survival and better quality of life than dialysis, yet graft failure remains a major challenge. Although a successful transplant... Read more
Printable Molecule-Selective Nanoparticles Enable Mass Production of Wearable Biosensors
The future of medicine is likely to focus on the personalization of healthcare—understanding exactly what an individual requires and delivering the appropriate combination of nutrients, metabolites, and... Read moreBusiness
view channel







