Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28650922›Full record

Trial reportMedical care2017

Randomized Trial of Reducing Ambulatory Malpractice and Safety Risk: Results of the Massachusetts PROMISES Project.

Gordon D Schiff, Harry Reyes Nieva, Paula Griswold, Nicholas Leydon, Judy Ling, Frank Federico, Carol Keohane, Bonnie R Ellis, Cathy Foskett, E John Orav and 6 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medical care, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 2019 John M. Eisenberg Patient Safety and Quality Awards: An Interview with Gordon D. Schiff.Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Gordon D Schiff*Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital †Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA ‡Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD §Massachusetts Coalition for the Prevention of Medical Errors, Burlington ∥Bureau of Health Care Safety and Quality, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Boston, MA ¶North Shore Medical Center, Salem #Institute for Healthcare Improvement, Cambridge **Risk Management Foundation of the Harvard Medical Institutions (CRICO) ††Coverys Corporation; One Financial Center ‡‡Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health §§Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital ∥∥Mongan Institute for Health Policy, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
Harry Reyes Nieva
Paula Griswold
Nicholas Leydon
Judy Ling
Frank Federico
Carol Keohane
Bonnie R Ellis
Cathy Foskett
E John Orav
Catherine Yoon
Don Goldmann
Joel S Weissman
David W Bates
Madeleine Biondolillo
Sara J Singer

Funding

Medical Malpractice and Patient Safety ProposalR18HS019508 · AHRQ · MASSACHUSETTS STATE DEPT OF PUB HEALTH · PI BIONDOLILLO, MADELEINE · 2010 to 2010
$2.9M
AHRQ HHS R18 HS019508
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEvaluate application of quality improvement approaches to key ambulatory malpractice risk and safety areas. STUDY

settingIn total, 25 small-to-medium-sized primary care practices (16 intervention; 9 control) in Massachusetts. STUDY

designControlled trial of a 15-month intervention including exposure to a learning network, webinars, face-to-face meetings, and coaching by improvement advisors targeting "3+1" high-risk domains: test result, referral, and medication management plus culture/communication issues evaluated by survey and chart review tools. DATA COLLECTION

methodsChart reviews conducted at baseline and postintervention for intervention sites. Staff and patient survey data collected at baseline and postintervention for intervention and control sites. PRINCIPAL

findingsChart reviews demonstrated significant improvements in documentation of abnormal results, patient notification, documentation of an action or treatment plan, and evidence of a completed plan (all P<0.001). Mean days between laboratory test date and evidence of completed action/treatment plan decreased by 19.4 days (P<0.001). Staff surveys showed modest but nonsignificant improvement for intervention practices relative to controls overall and for the 3 high-risk domains that were the focus of PROMISES.

conclusionsA consortium of stakeholders, quality improvement tools, coaches, and learning network decreased selected ambulatory safety risks often seen in malpractice claims.

Indexed as

Ambulatory CarePrimary Health CareAdultAgedHealth Care SurveysHumansMalpracticeMassachusettsMiddle AgedPatient SafetyRetrospective StudiesRisk ManagementYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID28650922
PMCPMC5739317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.