The ‘July Effect’: Worst Month For Fatal Hospital Errors, Study Finds
Study Finds More Fatal Medication Errors in July, Just When New Residents Arrive
By LAUREN COX
June 3, 2010—
There is an old saying among some doctors — do not let your friends and family schedule a surgery in July.
July is the month when graduates, fresh out of medical school, report to residencies in teaching hospitals. Anecdotally, at least, it’s been a time when medical errors peak.
A new study decided to see if the so-called “July Effect” was real.
Researchers from the University of California at San Diego investigated more than 62 million U.S. death certificates between 1979 and 2006. Of those, 244,388 deaths were caused by a medication errors in a hospital.
Month to month, the statistics showed a relatively equal chance for a fatal medication error — except at teaching hospitals in the month of July.
The study found that fatal medication errors spiked by 10 percent in July in counties with a high number of teaching hospitals, but stayed the same in areas without teaching hospitals.
The findings appear in the current issue of the Journal of General Internal Medicine.
David Phillips, the lead author of the study, said he was careful to rule out medication deaths caused by unexpected allergic reactions. He also didn’t include medication deaths that happened outside of the hospital, which might be the fault of the patient, and which previous research has found is often related to mixing medication and alcohol at home.
“If you have people dying from medication deaths and nobody thinks there is an error, that doesn’t spike in July. So there’s something going on in teaching hospitals in July, and the most common thing people think of was residents starting,” said Phillips, a professor of sociology at the University of California at San Diego.
Phillips said his study, which looked at computerized death certifications, had an advantage of looking at death certificates across the country, in a variety of hospital settings.
“With that we can safely generalize to the whole country,” said Phillips, who researched the study with co-author Gwendolyn Barker. “The disadvantage is that you don’t have very much detailed information per death certificate.”
That means the study only suggests that new residents are to blame. Further studies looking at hospital records might find a direct link to residents’ mistakes, or no link.
Doctors Well Aware of July Troubles
“It doesn’t surprise me when you got new residents,” said Dr. David Orentlicher, a medical doctor and professor of law at Indiana University.
Orentlicher said many aspects of starting a new residency might put people at risk for medical errors. Residents are inexperienced, often sleep-deprived — working 36-hour shifts in many cases — and simply may need to learn the system at a new hospital.
“You’ve got people who are inexperienced. You’ve also got people who are trying to learn a new system,” said Orentlicher.
For example, Orentlicher said he remembered from his own residency that it can be difficult to take over a new group of patients at the start of a shift.
“When you are transitioning and you are handing off patients to a new provider, not all of the information is communicated,” he said.
Orentlicher noted that in recent years, many teaching hospitals have offered better supervision of residents, and implemented new policies to prevent mistakes from sleep deprivation.
“There have been some improvements, but I think some of what this shows is the importance of having safeguards built into the system,” said Orentlicher.
An example would be the measure by anesthesiologists to design different tubing for different bottles of gas. Orentlicher said for years a certain number of deaths were caused by assistants mixing up lines to gas tanks before anesthesiologists got to work. But new connecting tubes it made it impossible to plug an oxygen line into the wrong tank.
July Effect May be Difficult to Address
“You should try to make sure humans don’t make mistakes, but humans are humans, so knowing that people make mistakes, how are you going to prevent it?” he said.
Orentlicher suggested focusing on using computer software to scan and check for prescription errors, or dosage errors.
“That’s the kind of thing you need to do. You are always going to have inexperienced residents and you can give them more sleep and you can give them more supervision,” he said.
Dr. Joanne Conroy, chief health care officer for the Association of American Medical Colleges, agreed July is a hectic month. But she also wondered if it was possible to pin the mistakes on new residents.
“Even though we associated July with new residents, actually there are a lot of new caregivers in July,” said Conroy. “It’s probably a time where there are a lot of health professionals assuming new responsibilities. Everybody moves up.”
Conroy also wanted to see data specific to the last five years in teaching hospitals. In that time, she said hospitals have implemented many new policies that increased supervision of residents, tailored responsibilities to the ability of the new doctor and allowed for more sleep.
“The study brings up more questions than it gives answers, but it’s certainly not anything we are ignoring and dismissive of at all,” said Conroy.
Copyright © 2010 ABC News Internet Ventures
Categories:
Tags:




H1N1: A Lesson To Remember
H1N1: A Lesson To Remember
04/13/2010 02:36PM
One year has passed since the first signs of a new influenza virus surfaced and started moving through the human population. In fact, it was on this day a year ago that the unfortunate first death related to Novel H1N1 influenza occurred in Oaxaca, Mexico.
A week later, April 24 to be exact, the reported cases started adding up and the new influenza virus was identified as containing human, avian and swine strains.
Unfortunately for the pork industry, and really all of animal agriculture, the virus was quickly and inaccurately labeled “swine flu.” Whether tying that label to the virus was done for sensational reasons, ignorance or laziness, the damage was underway.
The general media latched on to the “swine flu” label, emphasizing it at every turn. What’s more, social media took hold and created its own viral atmosphere, spreading misinformation wider and deeper than previously imagined. Indeed, Novel H1N1 was the first true exposure to the power of social media outlets among today’s public and the pork industry paid a heavy price.
In reality, the Novel H1N1 virus was not circulating in swine herds nor moving from pigs to people, rather it was people that would eventually expose a limited number of pigs to the virus.
Some consumers backed away from pork at the meat case, but as more clarity unfolded, those shoppers did return. The longer-lasting impact was in the export market as pork sales came to a screeching halt. Most foreign buyers started buying U.S. pork again by mid-year, but China took the hardest stance, just recently agreeing to re-open its market.
In the end, the Novel H1N1 episode is estimated to have cost the U.S. pork industry between $500 million and $1 billion. It came at time when hog prices were staged to begin their seasonal climb and pork producers desperately needed a profit opportunity.
So what are some the take-way lessons from the Novel H1N1 2009 episode?
• The export market offers a tremendous opportunity to expand your market, help feed the world and grow your industry, but it’s a volatile proposition. Those doors are quick to close whether the reasons are justifiable or not.
• When considering long-term threats to your industry or business, think well outside of your comfort zone. As one pork industry observer recently noted, prior to last April a human virus that could hurt pork demand was not on the list of possible threats to the U.S. pork industry.
• It’s not an exclusive club, meaning this type of incident is not exclusive to the pork industry; don’t think for a minute that such a scenario couldn’t happen to your product.
• We’re in a different communication age. Whether it’s 24-hour news or social media, fighting through the clutter and getting accurate messages out is harder than ever. Hats off to the pork industry and the federal government’s agricultural, human health and food agencies for trying to quell the rumors, distribute the facts and get the media to be more accurate in its reporting. But hopefully the response will be quicker and sharper the next time. (And you can bet there will be a next time.)
• Disease and contamination surveillance and traceback within the United States needs to be a priority, and that has taken an unfortunate setback with the demise of the National Animal Identification System. Will effective nationwide state-run systems emerge to take its place? I’m betting no, until a harsher challenge hits a wider range of species.
• Globally, governments and food and animal agriculture industries need to work together on these issues. That includes reporting, diagnosing and containment strategies.
• Closer to home, U.S. public health and animal health sectors need to work together, the building blocks of which are now being placed with the “One Health” initiative.
Novel H1N1 influenza virus cost the U.S. pork industry dearly, but it’s lessons are too easy to ignore by unaffected animal-ag sectors, and can be too easily forgotten when prices finally rebound. I truly hope that’s not the case this time.