Adverse Event Reporting: Lessons Learned from 4 Years of Florida Office Data

Background Patient safety regulations and medical error reporting systems have been at the forefront of current health care legislature. In 2000, Florida mandated that all physicians report, to a central collecting agency, all adverse events occurring in an office setting. Purpose To analyze the scope and incidence of adverse events and deaths resulting from office surgical procedures in Florida from 2000 to 2004. Methods We reviewed all reported adverse incidents (the death of a patient, serious injury, and subsequent hospital transfer) occurring in an office setting from March 1, 2000, through March 1, 2004, from the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration. We determined physician board certification status, hospital privileges, and office accreditation via telephone follow-up and Internet searches. Results Of 286 reported office adverse events, 77 occurred in association with an office surgical procedure (19 deaths and 58 hospital transfers). There were seven complications and five deaths associated with the use of intravenous sedation or general anesthesia. There were no adverse events associated with the use of dilute local (tumescent) anesthesia. Liposuction and/or abdominoplasty under general anesthesia or intravenous sedation were the most common surgical procedures associated with a death or complication. Fifty-three percent of offices reporting an adverse incident were accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, American Association for Accreditation of Ambulatory Surgical Facilities, or American Association for Ambulatory Health Care. Ninety-four percent of the involved physicians were board certified, and 97% had hospital privileges. Forty-two percent of the reported deaths were delayed by several hours to weeks after uneventful discharge or after hospital transfer. Conclusions Requiring physician board certification, physician hospital privileges, or office accreditation is not likely to reduce office adverse events. Restrictions on dilute local (tumescent) anesthesia for liposuction would not reduce adverse events and could increase adverse events if patients are shifted to riskier approaches. State and/or national legislation establishing adverse event reporting systems should be supported and should require the reporting of delayed deaths.

[1]  S. Feldman,et al.  The Safety of Liposuction: Results of a National Survey , 2002, Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.].

[2]  R. Iverson,et al.  Patient Safety in Accredited Office Surgical Facilities , 1997, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[3]  L. Fleisher,et al.  Inpatient hospital admission and death after outpatient surgery in elderly patients: importance of patient and system characteristics and location of care. , 2004, Archives of surgery.

[4]  E. Armstrong,et al.  Preventing errors in the outpatient setting: a tale of three states. , 2002, Health affairs.

[5]  N. Yamamoto,et al.  "Reverse turnover" transfer of a latissimus dorsi muscle flap to a large lumbar defect. , 2001, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[6]  M. S. Quattrone Is the physician office the wild, wild west of health care? , 2000, The Journal of ambulatory care management.

[7]  F. Grazer,et al.  Fatal outcomes from liposuction: census survey of cosmetic surgeons. , 2000, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[8]  F. Franko State laws and regulations for office-based surgery. , 2001, AORN Journal.

[9]  S. Feldman,et al.  Lower Adverse Event and Mortality Rates in Physician Offices Compared with Ambulatory Surgery Centers: A Reappraisal of Florida Adverse Event Data , 2004, Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.].

[10]  L. Kozak,et al.  Ambulatory and inpatient procedures in the United States, 1995. , 1998, Vital and health statistics. Series 13, Data from the National Health Survey.

[11]  Rod J. Rohrich,et al.  Safety of outpatient surgery: is mandatory accreditation of outpatient surgery centers enough? , 2001, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[12]  M. Heckmann Details From Dignity to Decay: Facial Expression Lines in Visual Arts , 2003, Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.].

[13]  W. Coleman,et al.  Morbidity and mortality related to liposuction. Questions and answers. , 1999, Dermatologic clinics.

[14]  S. Feldman,et al.  No Smoking Gun: Findings From a National Survey of Office‐Based Cosmetic Surgery Adverse Event Reporting , 2003, Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.].

[15]  B. Coldiron Office Surgical Incidents: 19 Months of Florida Data , 2002, Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.].

[16]  C. Wild Building a safer health system , 2001 .

[17]  R. Narins,et al.  Does the location of the surgery or the specialty of the physician affect malpractice claims in liposuction? , 1999, Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.].

[18]  R. Soto,et al.  Comparative outcomes analysis of procedures performed in physician offices and ambulatory surgery centers. , 2003, Archives of surgery.

[19]  P. Barie,et al.  Deaths related to liposuction. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  L. Kohn,et al.  To Err Is Human : Building a Safer Health System , 2007 .

[21]  L. Kozak,et al.  Ambulatory and inpatient procedures in the United States, 1996. , 1998, Vital and health statistics. Series 13, Data from the National Health Survey.