2011 Medical Professional Liability Symposium

Chicago, IL ~ March 24 & 25, 2011

RISK MITIGATION THROUGH TECHNOLOGY

RISK MITIGATION THROUGH TECHNOLOGY

Moderator:Kimberly M. Willis, CPCU, ARM, Senior Vice President, Healthcare Practice, Endurance U.S. Healthcare

Panelists:Jordan Dolin, Founder & Vice Chairman, EMMI Solutions

Jacques Feldmar, PhD, Chief Executive Officer, OBS Medical

Kathryn Eblen Townsend, RN, JD, ARM, CPHRM,

Director, Client Insurance Program, PeriGen

Larry L. Smith, JD, Vice President Risk Management, MedStar Health

Reducing Preventable Medical Injuries: How are we doing?

In 1999 the Institute of Medicine reported that medical injuries in US Hospitals accounted for:

Up to 98,000 DeathsMore than 1,000,000 Injuries

Recent Article in NEJM assessed our progress (N.C. Hospitals 2002-2007):

Hospitalized Patients had a 1 in 5 chance of harm from care received13.8% Permanent, Life Threatening or death63.1% Preventable

“Root Cause” vs “Real Cause”

• Root Cause Analysis: Has been ineffective Focus is on the End Result Solutions: more staff education or another new

policy• Real Cause Analysis:

Study of the relationship between individual errors (failings of individual clinicians) and system factors (the interaction of individuals with one another or the work environment) that resulted in the ultimate error

Real Cause – Top Common Causes

MedStar 5 year Closed Claims Study (134 Claims)• Communication Breakdown: Provider to patient; patient to

provider; clinician to clinician (24%)• Failure to respond to available clinical info (lab results,

tests results, patient symptoms) (23%)• Failure to monitor or assess patient’s physiological status

(20%)• Failure to order diagnostic test in a timely fashion (19%)• Failure to follow established policy or protocol (11%)• Failure to provide adequate supervision (10%)• Failure to obtain consult or referral in a timely fashion (8%)

Real CausesError/Injury Reduction

Initiatives

Common Cause % of Cases with Issue

Information Technology:

PeriBirthEmmi

OBS Medical

E-Learning

Simulation Training

Team Training

-Supervision-Chain of

Command-Competency

EvaluationCommunication Breakdown 24%Failure to respond to available clinical information 23%Failure to monitor or assess patient's physiological status 20%Failure to order diagnostic test in a timely fashion 19%Failure to follow established policy or protocol 11%Failure to provide adequare supervision 10%Failure to obtain consult or referral in a timely fashion 8%

Risk Reduction Initiatives

OB Risk Reduction Initiative

• 10 Year retrospective review of MedStar’s OB claims history:• 16% of all claims were OB (Frequency)• 31% of all claim dollars were OB (Severity)

• Board directed goals:• Develop system-wide OB care and clinical

practice standards against which our staff agree to be held accountable

• Produce measurable reduction in the number and cost of OB liability claims

Initial Results of OB Initiative

• Using Real Cause Analysis Model, top risks were identified and addressed:

• Oxytocin Guidelines• System-wide Patient Care Standards

Established

• Shortly after implementation and training of staff we experienced one of the worst preventable adverse outcomes we had ever experienced

• Clear violation of newly established protocol

Could Technology Help?

• While development of system-wide standards was a significant achievement, what was needed was the ability to alert staff to when deviations were “about to occur”

• The MedStar OB Leadership sought technology that had the capacity to:

• Provide real time alerts to providers at the bedside, and

• Provide OB Leadership with reliable data to monitor staff adherence to established Standards of Care

PeriBirth ROI Analysis

• While OB Leadership was confident that the technological support offered through PeriBirth had the potential to improve care and reduce patient injury, the organization struggled because there were so many other competing requests for funding.

• Challenge: to prove that the potential long term benefits outweighed the substantial up-front and ongoing annual operating costs, i.e., What was the ROI??

Closed Claim Case Simulation Leads to Wider RIO Analysis

• Clinicians simulated the use of PeriPirth using a closed claim that resulted in a $4M settlement

• Results of the simulation, particularly the system’s decision support responses, were compared to post-event retrospective expert reviews obtained for litigation purposes

Closed Claim Case Simulation Leads to Wider RIO Analysis

• Simulation results mirrored expert reviews both as to the deviations that occurred and the timing of those deviations.

• Non-reassuring fetal heart rate patterns not responded to timely; inappropriate use of Pitocin; failure to communicate appropriately with physician

• CONCLUSION: Patient injury and subsequent litigation cost would have been avoided

• When simulation technique was applied to all OB claims over the previous 10 years, actuary agreed PeriBirth should produce better financial results going forward.

Patient Engagement Expertise–Engaging interactive communications platform–Multi-modality approach leading to higher

knowledge retention–Innovative technology: trackable, secure –Focus: take an active role in patient health–2.5 million access codes prescribed–Data to support all of our value propositions

Who is EMMI?

Communication is Critical to Risk Management Efforts

“It’s clear to us, 22 years into this research, that lawsuits are not about bad outcomes… they are about expectations.” Linda Crawford, Author “When Medial Error Becomes Medical Malpractice: The Victims & the Circumstances.”

“Communication breakdowns are the most common root cause of health care errors that harm patients” Paul Schyve, MD, Senior Vice President, Joint Commission

According to JAMA, only 3% of malpractice claims involve actual medical negligence

It is Also Essential to Patient Satisfaction & Loyalty

–Four out of ten HCAHPS tie to communication

–According to a recent McKinsey Study: “77% of commercially-insured patients would switch hospitals to one that better informs patients about treatment both during and after visit.”

Poor Communication Impact Both the Top

and Bottom Line

Hospitals need to implement programs to both educate patients and set clear expectations–Provide patients with clear, focused information

– Involve patients in their care

–Facilitate patient-physician dialogue

–Deliver appropriate, consistent information

– Involve family or circle of care

–Leverage technology – most cost-effective vehicle

Enterprise Risk Solutions Must Support Broad Business Goals

Hospitals can leverage technology to take a proactive, executive supported approach that blends risk management efforts with the Hospital’s business objectives:– Patient safety programs

– Quality initiatives

– Patient satisfaction & HCAHPS scores

– Enhancing operational efficiencies

– Reducing cancellations

– Reducing length of stay

– AND proactive claim avoidance

Surgical Procedure

Foreseeable Complication

Satisfied Patient

Lawsuit Filed

Lawsuit Avoided

Continuum of Care

Traditional Risk Management Process

Enterprise Risk Management Process

Improving

Quality &

Safety

Managing

Expectations

Enhancing

Com

munications

MediationFails

Risk Management Gets Involved

Complaint Filed

True Enterprise Risk Solutions

Proof Statements & Studies We Conducted With

Our Clients

We seek to measure the impact of our programs whenever the opportunity presents itself. Below are a few examples of what we have documented to date.

– Improved Press Ganey Scores at The Methodist Hospital in Houston

– Improved HCAHPS scores at Banner Estrella in Arizona

– Reduced average length of stay at UPMC

– Reduced surgical cancelation rates at Beaumont in Michigan

– Improved patient flow at Grady Memorial

– Increased procedure attendance rates at University of Chicago

– Secured reinsurance discounts for multiple clients

– Our clients have claims rates well under the national average

Can Vital Signs Monitoring Help?

• Unexpected cardiac arrest: vital sign abnormalities observed 8 hours beforehand in >60% of cases

• Long term consequences depend on intervention time

• 86% of patient monitors alerts are false alerts

UK National Patient Safety Agency Recommendation: “to identify patients who are deteriorating and act early”

MEWS: Not a Solution

• Nurses do not have time• Clinicians do need not trust the system• Not enough information for communication

Visensia Software: Patient Physiological

Risk Index

• Calls medical staff as needed when needed• Takes into account vital signs correlations and trends

HR

RR

BP

SpO2

Temp

Clinical Results

• 95 % of Visensia alerts are true alerts• Mean advanced detection time: 6.33

hours• 58% reduction patients become seriously

unstable • 60% reduction in the crisis duration

critically unstable• In the 24 months to date no patient on the

Visensia monitor had an unexpected fatal cardiac event

Vital Sign Monitoring Can Reduce Risk and Cost

• Deterioration can be identified early• False alerts can be suppressed• Hospital workflow and communication can be improved• Nurse staffing can be optimized

Difficult to track and communicate multiple changing variables

Constant reaction to clinical crisis 86% false alarms

Risk Index

Technology solutions developed specifically for Obstetrics:• Clinical decision support and risk management tools designed

to improve outcomes and patient care • Include a robust suite of OB

performance measurements and reports

• Designed to help address thecommon findings in med/mal claims:

Communication errors Inadequate documentation of actions Improper actions – Both omission and commission Actions inconsistent with established protocols / workflow

• Employ physicians, midwives, and OB nurses; serving clients in the U.S. and Canada

Risk Reduction in Obstetrics

Fetal Monitoring Program with Clinical Decision Support

• Real-time FHR tracings analysis; using powerful automated pattern recognition software following NICHD definitions

• Providing continuous feedback on contraction frequency; alerts when excessive contraction rates occur and persist

Contraction Monitoring

w/Decisio

n Suppor

t

Electronic Fetal Monitoring

w/Decisio

n Support

OB-Specific EMR withClinical Decision Support

• Real-time, advanced clinical decision support• Multi-disciplinary, highly structured documentation system• Evidence-based practice protocols for care providers

EMRw/

Clinical Decisio

n Support

Documented Reduction in Med/Mal Costs

Multi-Hospital System

Shoulder Dystocia Risk Reduction Program

• Used in Physician Offices / Hospital Clinics / Hospital Triage• Personalized Estimate of Risk of Shoulder Dystocia w/Injury • Identifies 4 to 5 times More than Current Methods

• Clinician Protections:– Documented Risk Assessment Results– Patient Decision Participation– Informed Consent Documentation

Shoulder

Dystocia

Risk Identific

ation

Decreased Rates of Shoulder Dystocia

with Risk Reduction Technology

Prospective Hospital Study (2010)

•Shoulder Dystocia incidence decreased 50%

•Primary Cesarean rate remained stable

YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 (YTD)P Value

for Trend

ALL BIRTHS 2721 2372 1414

TOTAL CS % 37.2% 39.3% 39.5% 0.095

PRIMARY CS % 21.0% 22.5% 18.7% 0.224

REPEAT CS % 16.2% 16.8% 20.8% <0.001

% OF SD IN ALL BIRTHS

1.8% 1.7% 0.9% 0.056

% OF BIRTHS TESTED

7.9% 17.2% 17.5%

Target Market for Technology Solutions

And, Potential Decision-Makers

QUESTIONS?

RISK MITIGATION THROUGH TECHNOLOGY

Moderator:Kimberly M. Willis, CPCU, ARM, Senior Vice President, Healthcare Practice, Endurance U.S. Healthcare

Panelists:Jordan Dolin, Founder & Vice Chairman, EMMI Solutions

Jacques Feldmar, PhD, Chief Executive Officer, OBS Medical

Kathryn Eblen Townsend, RN, JD, ARM, CPHRM,

Director, Client Insurance Program, PeriGen

Larry L. Smith, JD, Vice President Risk Management, MedStar Health