Development and Implementation of an e-Trigger Tool for Adverse Drug Events in a Swiss University Hospital

References

• van den Bemt PM, Egberts TC, de Jong-van den Berg LT, Brouwers JR. Drug-related problems in hospitalised patients. Drug Saf. 2000;22(4):321–333. doi:10.2165/00002018-200022040-00005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu F, Jagannatha A, Yu H. Towards drug safety surveillance and pharmacovigilance: current progress in detecting medication and adverse drug events from electronic health records. Drug Saf. 2019;42(1):95–97. doi:10.1007/s40264-018-0766-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hazell L, Shakir SA. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2006;29(5):385–396. doi:10.2165/00002018-200629050-00003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffin FA, Resar RK. IHI global trigger tool for measuring adverse events (second edition). IHI Innovation Series white paper. Cambridge, MA: Institute for Healthcare Improvement; 2009. Available from: www.IHI.org. Accessed November 15, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Varallo FR, Dagli-Hernandez C, Pagotto C, de Nadai TR, Herdeiro MT, de Carvalho Mastroianni P. Confounding variables and the performance of triggers in detecting unreported adverse drug reactions. Clin Ther. 2017;39(4):686–696. doi:10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carnevali L, Krug B, Amant F, et al. Performance of the adverse drug event trigger tool and the global trigger tool for identifying adverse drug events: experience in a Belgian hospital. Ann Pharmacother. 2013;47(11):1414–1419. doi:10.1177/1060028013500939
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sam AT, Lian Jessica LL, Parasuraman S. A retrospective study on the incidences of adverse drug events and analysis of the contributing trigger factors. J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2015;6(2):64–68. doi:10.4103/0976-0105.152095
   Google Scholar
• Musy SN, Ausserhofer D, Schwendimann R, et al. Trigger tool-based automated adverse event detection in electronic health records: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(5):e198. doi:10.2196/jmir.9901
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hibbert PD, Molloy CJ, Hooper TD, et al. The application of the global trigger tool: a systematic review. Int J Qual Health Care. 2016;28(6):640–649.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Classen DC, Resar R, Griffin F, et al. ‘Global trigger tool’ shows that adverse events in hospitals may be ten times greater than previously measured [published correction appears in Health Aff (Millwood). 2011 Jun;30(6):1217]. Health Aff. 2011;30(4):581–589. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0190
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• German version IHI global trigger tool. Available from: http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Tools/IHIGlobalTriggerToolforMeasuringAEs.aspx. Accessed March 4, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• UK version IHI global trigger tool. Available from: http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Tools/IHIGlobalTriggerToolforMeasuringAEs.aspx. Accessed March 4, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Mevik K, Hansen TE, Deilkås EC, Ringdal AM, Vonen B. Is a modified global trigger tool method using automatic trigger identification valid when measuring adverse events? Int J Qual Health Care. 2019;31(7):535–540. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzy210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. The conceptual framework for the international classification for patient safety. Geneva: WHO; 2009. Available from: https://www.who.int/patientsafety/taxonomy/icps_full_report.pdf. Accessed July 21, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention. NCC MERP index for categorizing medication errors 2001. Available from: https://www.nccmerp.org/sites/default/files/indexBW2001-06-12.pdf. Accessed October 6, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• The use of the WHO-UMC system for standardised case causality assessment. Available from: http://www.WHO-UMC.org/graphics/4409.pdf. Accessed September, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Schwendimann R, Blatter C, Dhaini S, Simon M, Ausserhofer D. The occurrence, types, consequences and preventability of in-hospital adverse events - a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):521. doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3335-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sousa P, Uva AS, Serranheira F, Nunes C, Leite ES. Estimating the incidence of adverse events in Portuguese hospitals: a contribution to improving quality and patient safety. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14(311). doi:10.1186/1472-6963-14-311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silva MDDG, Martins MAP, Viana LG, et al. Evaluation of accuracy of IHI trigger tool in identifying adverse drug events: a prospective observational study. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2018;84(10):2252–2259. doi:10.1111/bcp.13665
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpov A, Parcero C, Mok CP, et al. Performance of trigger tools in identifying adverse drug events in emergency department patients: a validation study. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;82(4):1048–1057. doi:10.1111/bcp.13032
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diagnostic test calculator (version 2010042101). Available from: http://araw.mede.uic.edu/cgi-bin/testcalc.pl?DT=&Dt=&dT=&dt=&2x2=Compute. Accessed July 21, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Schildmeijer K, Nilsson L, Arestedt K, Perk J. Assessment of adverse events in medical care: lack of consistency between experienced teams using the global trigger tool. BMJ Qual Saf. 2012;21(4):307–314. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000279
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mastroianni PC, Vieira MB, Forgerini M, Nadai TR, Varallo FR. Serum potassium level used as trigger doubled the detection of adverse drug events when compared with calcium polystyrene sulfonate trigger: a cross-sectional study. Rev Ciênc Farm Básica. 2021;42:e724. doi:10.4322/2179-443X.0724
   Google Scholar
• Rozich JD, Haraden CR, Resar RK. Adverse drug event trigger tool: a practical methodology for measuring medication related harm. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12(3):194–200. doi:10.1136/qhc.12.3.194
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Davis J, Harrington N, Bittner Fagan H, Henry B, Savoy M. The accuracy of trigger tools to detect preventable adverse events in primary care: a systematic review. J Am Board Fam Med. 2018;31(1):113–125. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2018.01.170247
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Credland N, Dyson J, Johnson MJ. Do early warning track and trigger tools improve patient outcomes? A systematic synthesis without meta-analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2021;77(2):622–634. doi:10.1111/jan.14619
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishman L, Brühwiler L, Schwappach D. Medikationssicherheit: wo steht die Schweiz? [Medication safety in Switzerland: where are we today?]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2018;61(9):1152–1158. doi:10.1007/s00103-018-2794-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates DW, Cullen DJ, Laird N, et al. Incidence of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events. Implications for prevention. ADE Prevention Study Group. JAMA. 1995;274(1):29–34. doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03530010043033
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hug BL, Witkowski DJ, Sox CM, et al. Adverse drug event rates in six community hospitals and the potential impact of computerized physician order entry for prevention. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25(1):31–38. doi:10.1007/s11606-009-1141-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pirmohamed M, Breckenridge AM, Kitteringham NR, Park BK. Adverse drug reactions. BMJ. 1998;316(7140):1295–1298. doi:10.1136/bmj.316.7140.1295
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang JI, Chin HJ, Chang YS. Characteristics associated with the occurrence of adverse events: a retrospective medical record review using the global trigger tool in a fully digitalized tertiary teaching hospital in Korea. J Eval Clin Pract. 2014;20(1):27–35. doi:10.1111/jep.12075
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hardmeier B, Braunschweig S, Cavallaro M, et al. Adverse drug events caused by medication errors in medical inpatients. Swiss Med Wkly. 2004;134(45–46):664–670.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMaster C, Liew D, Keith C, Aminian P, Frauman A. A machine-learning algorithm to optimise automated adverse drug reaction detection from clinical coding [published correction appears in Drug Saf. 2019 Apr 15;:]. Drug Saf. 2019;42(6):721–725. doi:10.1007/s40264-018-00794-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pham M, Cheng F, Ramachandran K, Comparison A. Study of algorithms to detect drug-adverse event associations: frequentist, Bayesian, and machine-learning approaches. Drug Saf. 2019;42(6):743–750. doi:10.1007/s40264-018-00792-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jagannatha A, Liu F, Liu W, Yu H. Overview of the first natural language processing challenge for extracting medication, indication, and adverse drug events from electronic health record notes (MADE 1.0). Drug Saf. 2019;42(1):99–111. doi:10.1007/s40264-018-0762-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Govindan M, Van Citters AD, Nelson EC, Kelly-Cummings J, Suresh G. Automated detection of harm in healthcare with information technology: a systematic review. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010;19(5):e11.
   Google Scholar
• Härkänen M, Kervinen M, Ahonen J, Voutilainen A, Turunen H, Vehviläinen-Julkunen K. Patient-specific risk factors of adverse drug events in adult inpatients - evidence detected using the global trigger tool method. J Clin Nurs. 2015;24(3–4):582–591. doi:10.1111/jocn.12714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dequito AB, Mol PG, van Doormaal JE, et al. Preventable and non-preventable adverse drug events in hospitalized patients: a prospective chart review in the Netherlands. Drug Saf. 2011;34(11):1089–1100. doi:10.2165/11592030-000000000-00000
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharek PJ, Parry G, Goldmann D, et al. Performance characteristics of a methodology to quantify adverse events over time in hospitalized patients. Health Serv Res. 2011;46(2):654–678. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2010.01156.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar