Abstract

More than 20 years have passed since the first publication of estimates of the extent of medical harm occurring in hospitals in the United States. Since then, considerable resources have been allocated to improve patient safety, yet policymakers lack a clear gauge of the progress made. To quantify the cause-specific mortality associated with adverse effects of medical treatment (AEMT) in the United States from 1990 to 2016 by age group, sex, and state of residence and to describe trends in types of harm and associations with other diseases and injuries. Cohort study using 1990-2016 data on mortality due to AEMT from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) 2016 study, which assessed death certificates of US decedents. Death with International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-coded registration. Mortality associated with AEMT. Secondary analyses were performed on all ICD codes in the death certificate's causal chain to describe associations between AEMT and other diseases and injuries. From 1990 to 2016, there were an estimated 123 603 deaths (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 100 856-163 814 deaths) with AEMT as the underlying cause. Despite an overall increase in the number of deaths due to AEMT over time, the national age-standardized mortality rate due to AEMT decreased by 21.4% (95% UI, 1.3%-32.2%) from 1.46 (95% UI, 1.09-1.76) deaths per 100 000 population in 1990 to 1.15 (95% UI, 1.00-1.60) deaths per 100 000 population in 2016. Men and women had similar rates of AEMT mortality, and those 70 years or older had mortality rates nearly 20-fold greater compared with those aged 15 to 49 years (mortality rate in 2016 for both sexes, 7.93 [95% UI, 7.23-11.45] per 100 000 population for those aged ≥70 years vs 0.38 [95% UI, 0.34-0.43] per 100 000 population for those aged 15-49 years). Per 100 000 population, California had the lowest age-standardized AEMT mortality rate at 0.84 deaths (95% UI, 0.57-1.47 deaths), whereas Mississippi had the highest mortality rate at 1.67 deaths (95% UI, 1.19-2.03 deaths). Surgical and perioperative events were the most common subtype of AEMT, accounting for 63.6% of all deaths for which an AEMT was identified as the underlying cause. This study's findings suggest a modest reduction in the mortality rate associated with AEMT in the United States from 1990 to 2016 while also observing increased mortality associated with advancing age and noted geographic variability. The annual GBD releases may allow for tracking of the burden of AEMT in the United States.

Highlights

  • More than 20 years ago, the Harvard Medical Practice Study provided the first estimate of the extent of medical harm occurring in US hospitals.[1]

  • Despite an overall increase in the number of deaths due to adverse effects of medical treatment (AEMT) over time, the national age-standardized mortality rate due to AEMT decreased by 21.4% (95% uncertainty interval (UI), 1.3%-32.2%) from 1.46 (95% UI, 1.09-1.76) deaths per 100 000 population in 1990 to 1.15 (95% UI, 1.00-1.60) deaths per 100 000 population in 2016

  • From 1990 to 2016 in the United States, there were 123 603 deaths (95% UI, 100 856-163 814 deaths) in which AEMT represented the underlying cause of death

Read more

Summary

Introduction

More than 20 years ago, the Harvard Medical Practice Study provided the first estimate of the extent of medical harm occurring in US hospitals.[1]. Adverse event detection methods have continued to advance in recent years, a significant challenge remains in gauging the progress made at the state or national level. Point estimates of medical harm using retrospective surveillance systems—several of which have reported higher estimates of annual mortality related to medical errors than the IOM report—are derived from resource-intensive medical record reviews.[1,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22] These tools are excellent for use at a health care organizational level but make comprehensive and consistently applied assessments on a state or national scale challenging. Voluntary reporting systems may be used to monitor patient safety trends on a larger scale but are known to have selection bias and underreporting.[23,24,25,26] administrative databases screened for adverse events may be limited to a range of conditions or have an overall low detection sensitivity.[27,28,29,30]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call