ABSTRACT Introduction The study investigated the use of defects per million medication orders (DPMMO) as a SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and timely) indicator for monitoring medication safety in admission and discharge orders. The study aimed to develop and test a new indicator as an investigator of medication safety. Methods The study was conducted in 2018 at King Saud Medical City in Riyadh City in Saudi Arabia. A retrospective cross-sectional design was used. The research sample had 292 patients. The selected medication orders included two types of medication orders (admission and discharge order). After sufficient data had been gathered from the hospitals, a statistical analysis was carried out. Results Analysis of admission and discharge orders indicated that defects per million opportunities (DPMO) and DPMMO count were slightly low, while the sigma level for admission orders was slightly high. Thus, the admission order process was slightly better than the discharge order process. Conclusion The DPMMO indicator could serve as a SMART indicator of medical safety. It can be used as a standardized indicator in any healthcare facility, which serves as a recommendation guide in monitoring and evaluating healthcare processes or systems that affect the safety and outcomes of patients.

ABSTRACT Introduction The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of the Saudi national accreditation program on patient safety culture in a secondary-tertiary public hospital in Saudi Arabia. Methods Three hundred health professionals were randomly selected to participate in a survey. The survey was used in three phases: baseline, before accreditation, and after accreditation. Primary and secondary outcome measures were teamwork within hospital units, feedback and communication about errors, hospital handoffs and transitions, overall perceptions of safety, frequency of event reporting, and perception of patient safety grade. Results The survey response rate was 100%. A statistically significant impact of accreditation was found for teamwork within hospital units, feedback and communication about errors, and hospital handoffs and transitions ( p = 0.002, 0.009, and 0.010, respectively). Ordinal logistic regression confirmed that the accreditation program had a significant effect on overall perceptions of safety (odds ratio [OR] [1.42–13.56], p = 0.010), frequency of event reporting (OR [0.91–7.96], p = 0.073), and staff awareness of grading safety culture (OR [0.02–0.70]) and reporting behavior (OR 0.10 [0.03–0.37]). Conclusion The Saudi national accreditation program had a significant positive impact on some patient safety culture dimensions and outcomes. These findings provide local empirical evidence on the benefits of implementing national accreditation programs. Further research on a larger scale is highly recommended.

ABSTRACT Introduction A full root cause analysis (RCA) such as that required following a sentinel event is time-consuming, labor-intensive, and expensive. This quality improvement project used a similar but abbreviated process (mini-RCA and action; mini-RCA 2 ) in response to medication errors that caused less serious harm. Methods In 2018, all medication errors that caused harm due to system failures but were not sentinel events were investigated by mini-RCA 2 . The incidence of similar medication errors reported in the year before and in the year after the introduction of mini-RCA 2 was compared to determine the impact of this intervention. Similar events were identified by searching the safety reporting system database for reported medication errors by drug name (e.g., Humate® P) and/or event type (e.g., prescribing error—omission of a patient's home medications on admission to hospital). The time and labor costs of this intervention were estimated. Results Seven medication errors were investigated by mini-RCA 2 . More than 48 members of staff from 11 clinical and nonclinical departments contributed to the identification of 39 system failures and made 42 recommendations, of which 22 (52%) were implemented. This reduced the recurrence of reports of similar events from 35 (0.57%) to 21 (0.36%). Although this 0.21% absolute decrease did not achieve statistical significance, recurrence of similar harm events was reduced from 7 (0.11%) to 0 ( p = 0.016). Benefits were greatest when the mini-RCA 2 recommendations were fully implemented. This reduced the recurrence of similar events from 9 (0.21%) to 0 ( p = 0.007). A total of 251 hours (mean ± SD, 35.9 ± 16.6 hours) were required for this intervention. The associated labor cost was Saudi Arabia Riyal (SAR) 34,181 (US $8256; mean SAR ± SD, 4883 ± 1302 [mean US $ ± SD, $2102 ± $561]). Conclusion The use of mini-RCA 2 to review medication errors provided a structured process to manage reported events, monitor the implementation of recommendations, and assess the effectiveness of implemented actions. The use of this rapid process to investigate errors that cause harm but are not sentinel events reduced recurrence of similar medication errors. Although the time and cost required for this intervention is not insignificant, the cumulative benefit to patients, healthcare professionals, and the organization are greater.

ABSTRACT Introduction Delays in the discharging process can affect hospital efficiency. Improving patient flow in acute care hospitals is an essential issue that hospital management and research aim to achieve. Admission volume and LOS for hospitalized patients in the medical specialties department was examined at a tertiary care center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, to explore practical approaches to reduce the LOS. We aimed to identify and manage reasons for the delay in discharging patients from the medical specialties department at a tertiary care center in Saudi Arabia. Methods Admission and discharge data for hospitalized patients were collected from 2016–2018. In 2017, a FOCUS (find, organize, clarify, understand, select)–PDSA (plan, do, study, act) quality improvement method was used to improve the discharge processes, with specific measurable targets per year. The number of readmissions and mortality rates decreased significantly after the intervention was implemented, suggesting an improvement in the quality of treatment and the process of admission and discharge. Results Despite gradual increases in admissions from 2016 to 2018, the mean LOS decreased significantly between 2016 and 2018, from 9.16 to 7.47 days ( p < 0.001). The number of readmissions and mortality rates decreased after the intervention was implemented in 2017, suggesting an improvement in the process of admission and discharge. Conclusion The LOS can be reduced by implementing a quality improvement intervention, driven by a multidisciplinary committee involving healthcare personnel, to facilitate the optimal discharge mechanism through available hospital resources and services.

ABSTRACT Introduction Due to the complex nature of cancer cases, it is imperative that the involved healthcare providers coordinate the patients care plan in union to reach the best possible outcome in the smoothest and fastest manner. This is what multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) meetings strive to achieve. Conducting regular MTB meetings requires significant investment of time and finances. It is thus vital to assess the empirical benefits of such practice. Methods A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the literature regarding the impact of MTB meetings on patient 5-year survival. Relevant studies were identified by searching Ovid MEDLINE and Embase databases from January 1995 to July 2019. Studies were included if they assessed 5-year survival in cases discussed in MTB meetings and used a comparison group and/or a pretest and posttest design. Results Five articles met the study's inclusion criteria. Quality of studies was affected by selection bias and the use of historic cohorts. The results showed significantly improved 5-year survival in the MTB group compared with the non-MTB groups (odds ratio for 5-year death rate of 0.59, CI 0.45–0.78, p < 0.001). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that cancer MTB meetings have a significant impact on patients' 5-year survival. This could be because of several reasons, such as less time to treatment initiation, better adherence to guidelines, higher numbers of investigational imaging, lesser surgical complications, and recurrence rates. Future prospective studies are needed to further delineate reasons for improvement of outcome to enhance the benefits of this approach.

ABSTRACT Introduction Shared decision making is an essential component of a patient-centered healthcare system. Several studies have evaluated patients' perception of shared decision making; however, studies reporting physicians' perception of the shared decision-making process are lacking. The objective of this study was to assess physicians' perspectives on shared decision making with their patients in a tertiary care hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Methods This is a cross-sectional study, in which we adopted the nine-item physician version of the shared decision-making questionnaire (SDM-Q-Doc) to assess physicians' perception of shared decision making. The questionnaire was distributed online and in hard copy form randomly to our institution's physicians. Results We collected a total of 125 responses from various specialties. Means and percentage of agreement were tested, with the highest percentage of agreement ranging from 88% to 96.8%. There were significant differences between the groups regarding age and medical degree. There were no significant differences noted for sex or department. Conclusion Our findings suggest that most physicians at our institution have a positive attitude toward the process of sharing medical decisions with their patients.

ABSTRACT Introduction Selecting the most appropriate treatment for each patient is the key activity in patient-physician encounters and providing healthcare services. Achieving desirable clinical goals mostly depends on making the right decision at the right time in any healthcare setting. But little is known about physicians' clinical decision-making in the primary care setting in Bangladesh. Therefore, this study explored the factors that influence decisions about prescribing medications, ordering pathologic tests, counseling patients, average length of patient visits in a consultation session, and referral of patients to other physicians or hospitals by physicians at Upazila Health Complexes (UHCs) in the country. It also explored the structure of physicians' social networks and their association with the decision-making process. Methods This was a cross-sectional descriptive study that used primary data collected from 85 physicians. The respondents, who work at UHCs in the Rajshahi Division, were selected purposively. The collected data were analyzed with descriptive statistics including frequency, percentage, one-way analysis of variance, and linear regression to understand relationships among the variables. Results The results of the study reveal that multiple factors influence physicians' decisions about prescribing medications, ordering pathologic tests, length of visits, counseling patients, and referring patients to other physicians or hospitals at the UHCs. Most physicians prescribe drugs to their patients, keeping in mind their purchasing capacity. Risk of violence by patients' relatives and better management are the two key factors that influence physicians' referral decisions. The physicians' professional and personal social networks also play an influential role in the decision-making process. It was found that physicians dedicate on average 16.17 minutes to a patient in a consultation session. The length of visits is influenced by various factors including the distance between the physicians' residence and their workplace, their level of education, and the number of colleagues with whom they have regular contact and from whom they can seek help. Conclusion The results of the study have yielded some novel insights about the complexity of physicians' everyday tasks at the UHCs in Bangladesh. The results would be of interest to public health researchers and policy makers.