All posts by Kim Smiley

Mechanical engineer, consultant and blogger for ThinkReliability, obsessive reader and big believer in lifelong learning

Mercury in Cosmetics

By Kim Smiley

The toxic metal mercury has been found in cosmetics in at least 7 states in the US. Some products contain hundreds or thousands of times the allowable level.  Even small amounts of mercury are a concern as it accumulates in the body.

The use of products containing mercury can result in risk of illness or even death due to mercury poisoning.  Mercury accumulates in the body, increasing the risk with each application.  Additionally, family members can also be exposed, even if they aren’t using the product.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not allow mercury in cosmetics, whether manufactured in or imported into the US.  These mercury containing products are generally manufactured outside the US and are brought in by non-regulated channels, such as personal mail or luggage.   The FDA is constantly adding products found to contain mercury to the seizure list.  If found, the products are taken and the importers or sellers can face legal action.

Mercury is added to cosmetic products in an attempt to aid in skin lightening, anti-aging or blemish control.  However, it seems unlikely that any effectiveness the product may have is worth the possible side effects of mercury poisoning, which include damage to the kidneys and nervous system, tremors, depression, memory problems, and even death.  It can also interfere with the development of the brain in the unborn and very young.  Because mercury is sometimes listed under different names on the ingredient list (or imported products contain no ingredient list or the ingredient list is in a different language), it’s likely that users of these products are unaware they contain mercury.

The FDA recommends that you check the labels of any products advertised as face-lightening, anti-aging or blemish treatments.  If the label contains mercury, mercurous chloride, calomel, mercuric or mercurio, stop use immediately.  Additionally, if there is no ingredient label or the label is not in English, stop use immediately.  Store in a sealed bag and contact Poison Control or your healthcare provider.

We can investigate the issue of mercury in cosmetics in a Cause Map, or visual root cause analysis, in order to show the cause-and-effect relationships that lead to the potential for health effects.  To view the Outline and Cause Map, please click “Download PDF” above.  Or click here to read more.

Potential Dangers of Unpasteurized Dairy Products

By Kim Smiley

A new study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that unpasteurized milk is 150 times more likely to cause food-borne illness outbreaks than pasteurized dairy.  The CDC found that there were 73 disease outbreaks, two deaths and many permanent disabilities caused by the consumption of unpasteurized dairy products from 1993 to 2006.  Pasteurized dairy products aren’t perfect either.  According to the same report there were 48 disease outbreaks from contaminated pasteurized milk and cheese resulting in thousands of illnesses and one death during the same time period.  But the CDC determined that unpasteurized milk is a far greater risk since more illnesses were caused by it and it is estimated that only about one percent of the population consumed unpasteurized dairy products.

This issue can be analyzed by building a Cause Map, an intuitive, visual format for performing a root cause analysis.  In this example, the safety goal was obviously impacted since hundreds got sick from consuming unpasteurized milk.  The Cause Map is built by asking “why” questions and adding the information onto the Cause Map in order to show the cause and effect relationships between all the factors that contributed to the issue.  In this example, people got sick because they were exposed to harmful microorganisms.  This occurred because unpasteurized milk is more likely to be contaminated with harmful microorganisms and consumers drank unpasteurized milk.

Unpasteurized milk is more likely to be contaminated because by definition it isn’t heated to kill microorganisms.  During the pasteurization process, milk is heated to 161 degrees and held there for about 20 seconds to kill anything harmful that might be in the milk.  There is the potential for all milk to get contaminated because cow manure is a potential source of contamination and it’s a constant in the environment where milk is produced.

People drink unpasteurized milk because they prefer it and it’s legal to buy in many states.  Some consumers prefer unpasteurized milk for a number of reasons.  Unpasteurized milk has a distinct taste some people like.  There is also a general trend of people moving towards less processed foods.  The pasteurization processes decreases the amount of a few nutrients in milk so some people think that unpasteurized milk is healthier for them.  There are also a number of people who believe that unpasteurized milk has healing properties.  There are testimonies that unpasteurized dairy products have reversed a number of health issues, including allergies, asthma, digestive disorders, arthritis and behavior problems in children.

There are some who believe the sale of all unpasteurized diary should be banned because of the risk of contamination and the resulting illnesses, but unpasteurized dairy has very active, vocal advocates that believe strongly that its sale and consumption should be legal.  Both the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration urge consumers to avoid unpasteurized dairy products because of the potential health risks.

Shortage of Life Saving Cancer Drug

By Kim Smiley

Shortage of a lifesaving cancer drug, methotrexate, has hospitals scrambling to find enough drugs to treat patients. Methotrexate has long been a treatment for acute lymphoblastic leukemia, or ALL, and a type of bone cancer called osteogenic sarcoma.  A particular form of methotrexate without alcohol-based preservatives is needed to treat ALL because a high dose must be injected directly into the spines of patients and preservatives can be toxic and cause paralysi at such a high dose.  With treatment, ALL can be cured more than 90 percent of the time.  What makes this drug storage particularly heart breaking is that ALL most often strikes between ages 2 to 5.  If hospitals don’t have adequate supplies of preservative free methotrexate, children will die from a disease that is largely curable.

This issue can be analyzed by building a Cause Map, an intuitive, visual root cause analysis.  A Cause Map is built by determining the impact to the overall goals and then asking “why” questions to add causes that contributed to the issue and show the cause-and-effect relationships between the causes.  In this example, the safety goal is clearly impacted because there is a risk of patient death.

To begin adding causes to the Cause Map, we could ask why that is true.  Patients may die because they have cancer, the doctors may not be able to treat the cancer and the cancer is fatal if untreated.  Why might the doctors be unable to treat the cancer?  There is a shortage of the required medication because the plant that was the primary supplier for US is shut down.  The plant is voluntarily shut down so that significant manufacturing and quality issues can be addressed.  In order to understand the issues, it is also worth asking why one plant manufactured so much of the supply of methotrexate.  As much detail as necessary can be added to the Cause Map.  Once the Cause Map is built, the information can be used to brain storm solutions and determine which should be implemented.  To view a high level Cause Map of this issue, click on “Download PDF” above.

In this example, the FDA is currently negotiating with five plants that are approved to manufacture methotrexate to increase their production of the drug.  In the meantime, the plant that was shut down has worked with the FDA to allow distribution of some of the methotrexate that was manufactured, but not shipped prior to the shutdown.  Hospitals still have a smaller supply of methotrexate than would be desired, but all patients’ needs are currently being met.

 

High Heels May Increase Risk of Strains

By Kim Smiley

A new study found that habitually wearing high heels changes the biomechanics of how a woman walks and may increase the likelihood of strains, even when the heels are off.  The research compared young women who had worn high heels at least 40 hours a week for a minimum of two years with women who never or rarely wore heels.  Their walks were studied by using motion-capture reflective markers and electrodes to track leg-muscle activity.  The lengths of the muscle fibers in their legs were measured by ultrasound probes.

This example can be built into a Cause Map, an intuitive root cause analysis format.  A Cause Map lays out cause and effect relationships and helps illustrate how all factors that contribute to an issue relate to one another and to the overall problem.  To view a high level Cause Map of this issue, click “Download PDF” above.

After scrutinizing the walks of both those who favored heels and those who didn’t, the researchers determined that habitually wearing heels changed how the women walked, even when their feet were bare.  The high heel wearers took shorter, more forceful strides and kept their feet perpetually in a flexed position with their toes pointed.

Why does this matter?  The change in walking biomechanics means that the high heel wearers primarily engaged their muscles while walking.  The control group who rarely wore heels used a combination of tendons and muscles to walk.  The use of the tendons is important because they act as springs in the body and have the capacity to store energy.  Engaging tendons while walking is more efficient.  The high heel wearers had to use more energy to cover the same amount of ground as the control group and this can cause muscle fatigue. So this means that wearing high heels causes the muscles to be engaged more while walking, greater use of the muscles increases everyday strain on muscles and this may in turn increase the chance of strain injuries.

One of the more interesting findings was that frequently wearing high heels caused shortened fibers in calf muscles so that the changes in walking biomechanics remained even after high heels were removed.   It’s also interesting to note that the volunteers who participated in the study were young (the average age was 25) meaning that the changes the researchers found are not something that takes decades to occur.

The researchers recommend limiting high heel wear to a couple of times a week if possible and removing shoes when it’s an option, such as when seated at a desk.

Serious Side Effects From Low Dose Aspirin

By Kim Smiley

A recent study determined that the risks associated with regular use of low dose aspirin may outweigh the benefits for many patients. The researchers determined that regular aspirin users were 10 percent less likely to have a heart event and 20 percent less likely to have a nonfatal heart attack.  These statistics sound good except that regular aspirin users are also around 30 percent more likely to have serious gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding.  The overall risk of death was the same for both patients who regularly used aspirin and those who did not.

This study looked at nine randomized studies of aspirin use and included more than 100,000 patients.  The study only included patients who had not had a heart attack or stroke and involved giving participants either an aspirin or a placebo to see the benefits of regular doses of aspirin.

These findings have the potential to affect many people since nearly a third of middle-age Americans take a low dose aspirin regularly.  Benefits from aspirin seem to outweigh the risks for people who have a history of heart attacks, but this study calls into question the benefits for patients who are hoping to prevent their first heart attack or stroke.

This issue can be analyzed by building a Cause Map, an intuitive, visual form of root cause analysis.  In this example, the safety goal is the main goal that would be considered because of the higher risk of GI bleeding.  The higher risk of bleeding is caused by the fact that patients are taking aspirin regularly and that GI bleeding is a known side effect of aspirin.  People take aspirin because it has been shown to reduce the likelihood of blood clots.  Reducing blood clots will in turn reduce the risk of heart attacks and stroke since blood clots have the potential to block flow to the brain or heart.

The conclusion that the study draws is that there is no one size fits all solution to the question of whether patients should regularly take low dose aspirin.  The risks and potential benefits need to be determined on a case by case basis by the patient’s physician.  For an individual with a strong family history of heart disease, the benefits may very well outweigh the risk of GI bleeding, but for others the use of aspirin may not be worth the risk.

To view a high level Cause Map of this issue, click on “Download PDF” above.

Concerns over Faulty Implants

By Kim Smiley

Thousands of women received faulty breast implants between 2001 and 2010.  These implants contain substandard silicone, not approved for medical use, and are also rupturing at a usually high rate.  It isn’t clear at this time what the long term health risks associated with these implants might be.  The faulty implants were manufactured in France, but eighty percent were exported so the wide spread nature of the problem also complicates the implementation of any possible solutions. (These implants were not sold in the US.)

This issue can be investigated by building a Cause Map, an intuitive, visual root cause analysis.  A Cause Map is built by asking “why” questions to determine what causes contributed to an issue.  In this example, women are facing health risks because they received faulty breast implants.  The implants are considered faulty because they are filled with substandard, non-medical grade silicone and they are rupturing at twice the industrial average.

The implants were filled with industrial grade silicone, instead of medical grade, because industrial grade silicon is far less expensive and the company was trying to cut costs.  Hundreds of thousands of these implants were manufactured before any quality issues were raised so inadequate oversight should also be considered as a potential cause.  It isn’t clear why the implants are rupturing at an unusually high rate at this time, but that information can be added to the Cause Map once it is available.

The long term health consequences of this issue also aren’t clear yet.  The substandard silicone used may have impurities in it that could pose a health risk in addition to any health effects that result from the ruptured implants in general.  There are concerns that the implants are increasing the risk of breast cancer, but there isn’t any hard evidence that this is the case at this point.  All the countries involved are struggling to weigh the known risks of removing the implants with the unknown risks of leaving them in place.  There is also the question of costs and who will pay for removal or replacement of the faulty implants. Ongoing monitoring for signs of leakage and ruptures are recommended for any woman who chooses to keep the implants.

Surgical Tools Cleaned with Hydraulic Fluid

By Kim Smiley

In late 2004, a healthcare system in North Carolina realized that it had been using elevator hydraulic fluid instead of cleaning detergent when cleaning its surgical tools.  Before the problem was realized, the improperly cleaned tools were used on 3,650 patients.  An analysis by infection control, material and toxicology experts determined that the sterilization process of the tools was not affected and that trace metals left on the tools from the hydraulic fluid were in too small of amounts to cause risk to patients.  Nonetheless, the potential for these safety risks is an impact to the patient safety goal.  Additionally, the fact that improperly cleaned tools were used on patients is an impact to the patient services goal.  Lastly, the re-cleaning and sterilization required for the tools is an impact to the labor goal.

This incident can be examined in a Cause Map or visual root cause analysis. The first step is to define the problem with respect to the impacts to the organization’s goals, as described above.  The second step is to begin with the impacted goals and ask “why” questions to diagram the cause-and-effect relationships that led to the incident.  In this case, improperly cleaned tools were used on patients because the tools were cleaned with hydraulic fluid and the tools were used on patients.  The tools were used on patients because it was not immediately obvious that they had been improperly cleaned.  The tools did retain an oily feel; however, the tools are lubricated as part of the cleaning and sterilization process to avoid rust and ensure proper operation and so may retain an oily feel.

The tools were cleaned with hydraulic cleaning fluid because the hydraulic fluid was stored in the cleaning detergent containers and delivered to system hospitals.  The containers were filled with elevator hydraulic fluid by an elevator maintenance company and left where they were picked up by the cleaning detergent provider.  The provider did not realize that the containers had been tampered with (as they were not relabeled and either had no indication of tampering or were not inspected for tampering) and so delivered them to the hospitals for use.

Once the problem was realized, the affected tools were re-cleaned and sterilized and the detergent replaced.  Follow-up monitoring was performed and appointments offered to the affected patients, despite determination that the sterilization process was not affected and that the trace metals were not in sufficient amounts to affect patient safety.  Employees were trained in container management and a process was added to verify the status of containers delivered to and used in the hospital.  Additionally, a process to determine when product integrity has been compromised.  An external review by the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services has certified that the impacted hospitals are in compliance with standards based on these implemented corrective actions.

To view the Outline, Cause Map and implemented solutions, please click “Download PDF” above.  Or click here to read information provided by the affected healthcare system.

America’s Food Deserts

By Kim Smiley

A food desert is a community that lacks adequate access to healthy, nutritious food because they don’t have sufficient stores that sell these items at an affordable price, such as a supermarket. Both isolated rural areas and low income urban neighborhoods are typical locations where a food desert might exist in the United States.  In these locations, residents typically must rely on the food that is available nearby, usually small convenience stores and fast food restaurants.  Smaller convenience type stores generally don’t offer a variety of fresh food and vegetables and the prices are typically higher.  Many times the result is a less healthy diet and the potential health problems that go along with it.

A significant percentage of the US population lives without relatively easy access to a supermarket.  In a report to Congress, the USDA stated that 2.2 percent of the US population lives more than a mile from a supermarket and does not have access to a vehicle.  That’s 2.3 million people who constantly struggle with the logistics of buying groceries, even before the rising cost of food is considered.

How did food deserts come to exist?  In a country as wealthy and as industrialized as the United States, how is it that so many people don’t have access to a grocery store?

Food deserts came to exist because companies followed demand and built grocery stores where they would be most profitable, which is not typically low income urban locations or very rural areas.  Low income families typically have less money to send on groceries so more supermarkets were built in the more profitable, affluent neighborhoods than in poorer communities.  Some low income urban areas are also associated with higher crime rates so companies were hesitant to build in those areas.  People with lower incomes are also less likely to have access to a vehicle so the problem of buying food is compounded when the supermarkets are farther away from the low income communities.  Supermarkets are also less likely to be built in low population density rural areas because there are fewer potential customers and the stores aren’t as profitable.

While it’s relatively easy to identify why food deserts came to be, it’s still a tricky problem to solve.  Some groups have suggested that the government should provide subsidies to companies that build stores in food deserts.  Others are working to bring in foods to the people living in food deserts.

If you’re curious about where food deserts exist in the US, click here to view a map of the locations.  Click here to read a previous blog that discussed how food deserts are a cause of childhood obesity.

Young Boy Killed by Projectile During MRI

By Kim Smiley

It has been over ten years since six year old Michael Colombini died as a result of injuries that occurred during a routine MRI.  He was undergoing a post-surgery MRI after removal of a benign brain tumor when he was hit by a magnetic oxygen tank that was pulled toward the MRI machine at high speed.  His skull was fractured and he died two days later.

How did this horrible accident happen?

A Cause Map, or visual root cause analysis, can be built to help explain the causes that contributed to this death.  In this example, the patient needed an MRI because he had a brain tumor removed and he was hit by a magnetized oxygen tank while in the MRI machine.  This occurred because the oxygen tank was attracted by the huge magnet in the MRI and flew towards the machine at high speed.

MRI magnets will always attract magnetic things, even when the machine is off.  Bringing a magnetic oxygen tank into a MRI examination room is a dangerous situation.  In this example, there are several reasons why the tank was brought into the MRI area.  The tank was bought into the room by a well-meaning nurse who heard the anesthesiologist calling for oxygen.

The nurse had returned to the MRI area in order to retrieve something she had left there earlier in the day when she had accompanied a patient to the space.  She heard the anesthesiologist calling for oxygen and saw the tanks nearby so she handed one to the doctor.  Contributing to this accident is the fact that the oxygen tanks were stored near the door to the MRI exam room.

The anesthesiologist was calling for oxygen because the patient had low oxygen saturation levels and needed additional oxygen.  The patient was a six year old boy so he had been sedated for the MRI procedure.  A piped in system normally supplied oxygen for use during MRIs, but the system had malfunctioned.  Both MRI techs on duty had gone to investigate the piped in oxygen system failure so nobody trained on MRI safety was around when the nurse bought in the oxygen tank.

Some simple solutions that might have helped prevent this accident, even with the oxygen system failure include storing oxygen tanks far away from the MRI exam room and not allowing unescorted non-MRI staff into the space.  It’s also always a good idea to have an acceptable back up for important systems planned in advance.  If a second safe oxygen supply was already provided, this accident could have been prevented.

The magnets in MRI machines are 200 times stronger than a refrigerator magnet and, as this example illustrates, the potential for injuries from projectiles is very real. Like most accidents, this death was caused by a number of failures that occurred at the same time.  All of the staff involved was trying to do the right thing, but the end result was the unnecessary death of a young boy.

Unbalanced Antidepressant Use

By Kim Smiley

A recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report provided results of a study of Americans taking antidepressants from 2005 to 2008.  The study came to two interesting conclusions that have a potential impact on patient safety.  We can outline the potential impacts of the results of this study in a problem outline, then provide a graphic analysis of the causes within a Cause Map, or visual root cause analysis.

First, the study determined that antidepressant use has increased 400% since 1988.  Eleven percent of Americans over the age of 12 are now taking antidepressants.  Any drug has risks, and more people taking a drug means that the total risk for side effects is higher.  Additionally, traces of certain kinds of antidepressants have been found in  the water supply, likely caused partially by improper disposal of these drugs.  (Don’t flush them down the toilet!)  The cost of anti-depressants is an additional issue raised with the high usage of these drugs.

Even though talk therapy is a very useful tool for treating depression, less than 1/3 of patients who are taking antidepressants have met with a mental health professional in the last year.  Patients reportedly prefer drugs to talk therapy, potentially because reimbursement for prescriptions is generally much simpler and cheaper than reimbursement for mental health therapy, which can be capped or may not be covered at all.

Because most antidepressants are obtained with a prescription, the higher usage of antidepressants indicates a higher rate of diagnosis of depression.  While the faltering economy can take some of the blame, hormonal changes (as middle aged women are the most frequent users of antidepressants), a decreased stigma against depression, and increased awareness of the drugs, thanks to pharmaceutical marketing, have also been listed as potential causes for the increase.

Many agree that the decreased stigma towards depression is a positive step; however, the other side of the study found that only one third of people with severe depression symptoms are taking antidepressants.  While many with mild depression symptoms may find relief with talk therapy or other options, American Psychiatric Association guidelines recommend medication for moderate to severe depression symptoms.  This indicates that patients with severe depression may be under medicated and increases the risk for mental health problems and/or suicide.  There are many possibilities for why individuals with severe depression are not getting – or seeking – the help they need.  The high out of pocket cost for anti-depressants may be a barrier to some, as is the ability to receive screening for depression.  Although there are certainly other roadblocks along the way, making screening easier to receive may increase the treatment rate for sufferers.  The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services recently announced it would be covering annual screening for depression.  Hopefully this first step will result in more people getting the help they need.

To view the Outline and Cause Map, please click “Download PDF” above.  Or click here to read more.