Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Mar;13(3):e223-e230.
doi: 10.1200/JOP.2016.016634. Epub 2017 Jan 17.

Performance of a Trigger Tool for Identifying Adverse Events in Oncology

Affiliations

Performance of a Trigger Tool for Identifying Adverse Events in Oncology

Allison Lipitz-Snyderman et al. J Oncol Pract. 2017 Mar.

Abstract

Purpose: Although patient safety is a priority in oncology, few tools measure adverse events (AEs) beyond treatment-related toxicities. The study objective was to assemble a set of clinical triggers in the medical record and assess the extent to which triggered events identified AEs.

Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study to assess the performance of an oncology medical record screening tool at a comprehensive cancer center. The study cohort included 400 patients age 18 years or older diagnosed with breast (n = 128), colorectal (n = 136), or lung cancer (n = 136), observed as in- and outpatients for up to 1 year.

Results: We identified 790 triggers, or 1.98 triggers per patient (range, zero to 18 triggers). Three hundred four unique AEs were identified from medical record reviews and existing AE databases. The overall positive predictive value (PPV) of the original tool was 0.40 for total AEs and 0.15 for preventable or mitigable AEs. Examples of high-performing triggers included return to the operating room or interventional radiology within 30 days of surgery (PPV, 0.88 and 0.38 for total and preventable or mitigable AEs, respectively) and elevated blood glucose (> 250 mg/dL; PPV, 0.47 and 0.40 for total and preventable or mitigable AEs, respectively). The final modified tool included 49 triggers, with an overall PPV of 0.48 for total AEs and 0.18 for preventable or mitigable AEs.

Conclusion: A valid medical record screening tool for AEs in oncology could offer a powerful new method for measuring and improving cancer care quality. Future improvements could optimize the tool's efficiency and create automated electronic triggers for use in real-time AE detection and mitigation algorithms.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Brennan TA, Leape LL, Laird NM, et al. Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients: Results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:370–376. - PubMed
    1. Runciman W, Hibbert P, Thomson R, et al. Towards an international classification for patient safety: Key concepts and terms. Int J Qual Health Care. 2009;21:18–26. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mattsson TO, Knudsen JL, Brixen K, et al. Does adding an appended oncology module to the Global Trigger Tool increase its value? Int J Qual Health Care. 2014;26:553–560. - PubMed
    1. Mattsson TO, Knudsen JL, Lauritsen J, et al. Assessment of the global trigger tool to measure, monitor and evaluate patient safety in cancer patients: Reliability concerns are raised. BMJ Qual Saf. 2013;22:571–579. - PubMed
    1. Institute of Medicine . Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2013. - PubMed

Publication types