Category Archives: Root Cause Analysis

Root Cause Analysis

Tungsten Particles Remain in Patient’s Bodies After Clinical Trial

By ThinkReliability Staff

Thirty women who participated in a research clinical trial that hoped to revolutionize the treatment of breast cancer are now facing the possibility of long-term effects from tungsten particles left in their body or disfiguring surgery.  The trial involved radiation treatment that could be performed in one short session instead of over many weeks, offering obvious benefits to the patients.  However during follow-up checks after the trial, many women found particles of tungsten, a heavy metal, in their breasts and chest muscles.

Some physicians have recommended removal of the affected areas.  The choice between that, or living with the risk of tungsten particles, whose long-term effect has not been thoroughly studied, is an impact to the patient safety goal.  In addition the particles will look like calcium deposits, which can be an indication of cancer, in future mammograms, resulting in an impact to the patient services goal.  The device has since been recalled, which is an impact to the property goal, and at least one suit has been filed against the manufacturer of the device and the hospital performing the trial.  It is believed that 30 women are affected.

The health issue of leaving the tungsten within the patient’s body is caused by a particle of unknown long-term safety being deposited in the body.  The tungsten appears to have been shed by a device used during radiation treatment to prevent radiation from reaching other parts of the body.  It’s still unknown how a device that would shed particles into a patient’s body made it into a human clinical trial.  What is known is that the device went through the accelerated FDA approval process known as 510(k) for devices that are similar to devices that have already been approved.  It’s unclear which device was considered similar enough to allow for the approval of this one, but there have been many concerns that the FDA’s approval process is insufficient.

An in-depth look at the approval process of the FDA is currently underway to determine where changes in the process may result in a more thorough review and , most importantly, prevent an issue like this one from reoccurring.

Root Cause Analysis

Aging Surgeons

By ThinkReliability Staff

Over 20% of today’s physicians are over the age of 65.  Should this be cause for concern?  After all, we rely on our doctors to take care of us when we are often at our most vulnerable.  While increased age means increased experience, there are also down sides.  Age can bring with it a decrease in physical and mental capabilities, as well as a reluctance to adopt newer technologies.  At least this is what multiple studies have hinted at over the past few years.

The problem is that such a “decrease in capabilities” is highly subjective and difficult to measure.  Surgeons rely on a variety of cognitive and tactile skills in their craft – steady hands, learning new techniques, composure under stress, communication skills, and so on.  As highly trained professionals, it is sometimes difficult to decide when it is time to call it quits.

Furthermore, in the United States, age-based discrimination is outlawed in most industries except where regulated.  For instance, airline pilots and air traffic controllers are both subject to earlier-than-average retirements due to public safety concerns.  Many federal and state public workers, such as corrections officers and firefighters, are similarly limited. It’s difficult to argue that some physicians don’t make similar split-second, life-and-death decisions – especially surgeons.

The associated Cause Map visually lays out the dilemma.  Surgeons who aren’t performing adequately do so for two reasons.  First, they have a medical condition precluding them from performing to standards.  (Note that to keep this Cause Map simple, other issues such as mental health problems, addiction, and failure to maintain their continuing education were not examined.)  Second, they are allowed to continue practicing.

Such physicians continue after their abilities are impacted for a number of reasons.  Some might be unaware of their condition or unwilling to accept it, both stemming from a belief that they are still competent to practice.  Additionally, current processes at most hospital are slow to identify such physicians.  Most hospitals rely on co-workers to identify such doctors, clearly a highly subjective and ethically complex system.  Age-based screening is not common at many hospitals, partly because of resistance from hospital staff.  In fact, only 5-10% of hospitals have directly addressed this issue.  Labeling doctors as “unfit to practice” isn’t necessarily a bad thing.  If such doctors are identified early, patient safety is enhanced.  Additionally, early identification can sometimes allow those doctors to continue practicing in a controlled and safe environment.

Now that the problem has been laid out, the next step is to look for possible solutions.  It’s clear that little can be done about age-related deterioration.  So the focus moves to the other branch of the Cause Map.  Here there are a number of possibilities.  While age-based screening is certainly an option, it’s not the only one.  For instance, including hospital staff in making decisions might also help decrease resistance to identifying deficient physicians.  Additional training on the impacts of age might make co-workers more willing to discuss their concerns.  Or doctors might be more willing to adapt to their limitations if regular screening can identify possible health problems.

While more research is needed to determine how extensive this issue is, it is clear that at most hospitals current procedures to identify deficient physicians are lacking.

Root Cause Analysis

Why Potassium Iodide?

By Kim Smiley

In addition to evacuating the people near the nuclear plants in crisis, the Japanese government has distributed potassium iodide.  There has also been a run on potassium iodide on the West Coast of the United States.

Why?

Why would pills protect against radiation?  The first part of the answer lies in the thyroid gland.  The thyroid contains some of the only cells in the body that can absorb iodine.  The thyroid needs iodine in order to produce thyroid hormones which are used by nearly every cell in the body and help regulate important functions such as metabolism.  The second part of the answer is that iodine-131 is a common isotope produced by the fission of uranium atoms during the operation of nuclear reactors.  When fission products are released into the environment and consumed by humans, the thyroid can absorb radioactive iodine, just like it absorbs stable iodine.  Exposure from radioactive iodine can lead to thyroid cancer.

When exposure to radiation is possible, potassium iodide is used because the thyroid has a limit to how much iodine it needs.  If the thyroid has been flooded by stable iodine, it decreases the chance that radioactive iodine will be absorbed.  Any unneeded iodine should be passed through the body relatively quickly, limiting the amount of exposure to the radiation emitted by the iodine-131.

History has shown us that the threat of thyroid cancer is very real following a nuclear reactor accident.  There has been an epidemic of thyroid cancer in the area affected by the Chernobyl accident in 1986.  Experts believe that distribution of iodide potassium could have largely prevented this long term health consequence.  Additionally, the majority of iodine exposure came from drinking milk produced by cows living in the area contaminated by the accident.  If people had avoided drinking contaminated milk in the months following the accident, the effects of radioactive iodine would have greatly been diminished.  Another possible solution that could be applied to help prevent thyroid cancer following a reactor accident would be to test all food and drink for contamination.

There are a few other important facts to consider about potassium iodide.  It is not recommend for low levels of radiation.  The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Committee has stated that very low levels of radiation may reach the United Stations, but that the amount is well below any harmful limit.  Officials have repeatedly stated that there while use of the potassium iodide is an appropriate precaution for individuals near the accident site in Japan, there is no need for people within the US to take potassium iodide to protect against the effects of radiation.  There are also a number of unpleasant side effects associated with potassium iodide and it is recommended that you speak to your doctor before taking the supplement.

Click on the “Download PDF” button above to view a Process Map of how the body absorbs iodine and a high level Cause Map of the thyroid epidemic following Chernobyl.

Root Cause Analysis

Toddler Dies From Contaminated Wipes

By Kim Smiley

A 2 year old boy died December 1, 2010 following a routine surgery to remove a benign cyst from near his spinal cord and brain.  He appeared to be recovering well when he contracted bacterial meningitis and quickly succumbed to the infection.  Tests revealed the bacteria were a rare strain, Bacillus cerus, which is typically associated with food poisoning and not hospital infections.  How the patient was exposed to the bacteria was initially unknown, but now a potential source has been identified.

On January 5, 2011, The Triad Group, one of the nation’s largest medical product suppliers, announced a massive recall of alcohol wipes, swabs and pads because of contamination from the same rare bacteria, Bacillus cerus.  Products by this manufacturer were used to care for the boy during his hospital stay.  Although, a definitive link between the death of the boy and the recalled pads has yet to be established, there is a lawsuit pending.

Since the time of the recall, other people have come forward with possible cases of infection from Bacillus cerus from using the recalled products.  The FDA has launched an investigation.

Even through the investigation is not completed, this example can be built into a Cause Map based on the information that is available.  A Cause Map is an intuitive, visual method of performing a Root Cause Analysis. Any additional information can be added to the Cause Map as it becomes available and any necessary changes made.

When beginning a Cause Map, the first step is to determine the impact to the organizational goals and document them in an Outline.  In this case, the Safety Goal was impacted because a boy died and there is potential that more people were infected by the same harmful bacteria.  Once the impact to the goals is completed, Causes are added to the map by asking “why” questions. In this case, the boy died from bacterial meningitis because he was exposed to Bacillus cerus.  Next, we would ask “why” he was exposed to the bacteria.

Because the link between the recalled wipes and the death of the patient has not been officially determined, a question mark is included with that information when it’s added.  It’s important that all evidence or lack of evidence is documented on the Cause Map so that it is clear which Causes are agreed upon, known facts and which still need to be proven. Click on the “Download PDF” button above to see a high level Cause Map of this example.

The recall is a short term solution to this problem, but at least all products known to be contaminated should be removed from shelves and hospital storerooms.  It isn’t clear yet what steps are needed at the manufacturer to ensure safety of consumers, but the affected products will not be sold again until they are tested and deemed safe.

Root Cause Analysis

Kidney Transplant Mix-up

By ThinkReliability Staff

On January 29, 2011, a kidney was transplanted into the wrong patient.  No one was injured, but this was known as a “near miss” – had things gone slightly differently, it could have resulted in severe consequences.  Namely, the patient who received the incorrect kidney could have been killed or seriously injured, had the kidney not happened to be compatible with that patient also.  (The kidney donor had Type O blood, known as the universal donor, which aided in the compatibility.)  The patient who was supposed to receive the kidney could have had a long wait back  on the transplant list.  Luckily, a new donor was found for the second kidney and a new kidney was found for the second donor fairly quickly.  Although there were no injuries, the high potential for injury results in an impact to the patient safety goal.

To try and help figure out what went wrong, we begin with the impacted goal and ask “Why” questions to fill out the analysis. We discover that there were two kidneys that arrived at the hospital simultaneously.  In order for the kidneys to be switched, the kidneys must have been mislabeled, or miss-identified once at the hospital.  The coordinating agency for transplants states that the packaging and labeling of the organs was correct.  We then turn our focus to the identification steps of the organ once at the transplant center.

To aid in determining where process improvements can be made, first we need to define the process.  We can do this with a process map – a step by step instruction of how a process is performed.  In this case, the steps for transplants have been developed by an outside agency – the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS).  We can outline these steps in our Process Map.  Because of the high risk for consequence should an error occur, the process is well-defined and consists of checks to ensure that mismatches do not occur.  The last highly publicized incident of a transplant error was in 2003 (see more about that incident here).

The hospital involved has not released details about what might have occurred in the process; however, it’s certain that they’re looking at the process with a fine-tooth comb and trying to implement improvements.  The transplant program has closed down while they’re doing so.

Root Cause Analysis

Pregnant Woman Receives Wrong Medication

By ThinkReliability Staff

One of the most exciting moments in a young couples’ relationship is finding out that they are about to start a family.  New moms-to-be will take extra precautions to make sure their child has the best possible start in life – a healthier diet, a regimen on prenatal vitamins, limitations on coffee and so on.  However, that excitement is sometimes tempered with worry about the new baby’s health.

Mareena Silva had just found out she was expecting.  Six weeks pregnant and a bit under the weather, her doctor prescribed Mareena antibiotics to clear up an infection.  She filled the prescription at the local Safeway, and after taking the medicine as directed, became nauseous.  Upon checking the medication label, she made the horrifying discovery that she had been given the wrong medicine.

Instead of the antibiotics she had been prescribed, Mareena had taken a dose of methotrexate.  Methotrexate is a chemotherapy drug which targets rapidly dividing cells, like cancer…or embryos.  Her doctor urged her to vomit whatever medicine she could.  Then an ambulance rushed her to the hospital where she was given charcoal to absorb any medication remaining in her stomach.  Unfortunately, at this point all she can do is wait to see if her unborn child was affected by the unintended medication.  Methotrexate can cause serious birth defects, especially during the critical formative period during the first trimester, and even miscarriage.  Reports state that the baby faces 50-50 odds of developing abnormalities.

How did Mareena end up with a drug sometimes used to abort ectopic pregnancies?  The pharmacy staff dispensing the medication accidentally handed her one intended for patient in her late 50’s with a very similar name.  According to statements released by Safeway, pharmacy staff failed to repeat Silva’s name to her twice and verify her birth date – standard company policy.  The company has said that they are conducting an investigation to see why their procedure was not followed.  They will not be the only ones looking into the incident; the Colorado Pharmacy Board will also be reviewing the case.

Unfortunately mistakes like this are far too common.  No national agency tracks how many prescriptions are incorrectly distributed, and few states track such information either.  However, a 2003 study by Auburn University indicates that the dispensing error rate could conservatively be estimated at 1%.  That’s astonishing considering billions of prescriptions are filled each year.  How might those errors be prevented?  Dispensing medication is more complex than meets the eye, and there are a number of places a mistake can happen.  In this instance, Safeway’s pharmaceutical staff did not follow proper procedures for dispensing medication.  18.3% of dispensing errors were caused by procedures not followed according to U.S. Pharmacopeia’s 2003 study of medication error reports.

While the investigation will unearth further information about what happened behind the counter that day, a detailed Cause Map pictorially lays out how the incident occurred and why.  As the investigation unfolds, more information can be added and solutions can be developed to prevent future incidents like this one from happening.

Root Cause Analysis

A Controversial Approach to the Fight Against AIDS

By Kim Smiley

Not too long ago, the Downtown Eastside neighborhood in Vancouver, British Columbia had the fastest-growing AIDS epidemic in North America.  But that has is no longer true.  Vancouver has succeeded where many cities have failed and has recently seen a decrease in the rate of new AIDS infections.

How did Vancouver do it?  And can it be done elsewhere?

In order to understand how Vancouver has been successful in fighting the AIDS epidemic, we first need to understand why there were such high infection rates to begin with.  This problem can be approached by building a Cause Map, an intuitive visual root cause analysis method that lays out the Causes to a problem.  (Click on the “Download PDF button” to see a high level Cause Map of this example.)

A little research shows that one of the major contributors to this problem is that a significant percentage of the population in this area is engaged in high risk behavior.  The Downtown Eastside area has been called the center of the injection drug epidemic.  Along with rampant drug problems, this area is also home to a thriving sex trade.  Shared needles and unprotected sex significantly contributed to the fast growing rate of new infections in the area.

As many cities have found out, it is difficult to change behavior.  Drug addicts are typically one of the hardest to reach populations.

Vancouver’s approach has been to create a “safe injection site”, called Insite.  At Insite, addicts can inject drugs they bought on the street under the supervisor of nurses.  They are provided clean needles and a safe location.  To make this work, Insite currently has a special exemption from narcotics laws.

Insite also tests for HIV and provides aggressive treatment for those infected.  Aggressive treatment seems to be one of the main factors that has slowed the infection rate in Vancouver.  Antiretroviral medications lower the amount of virus in the blood, which in turn makes a person 90 percent less infective.

Research has shown that the rate at which the AIDS virus is transmitted can be lowered by treating infected people even if they still engage in high risk behavior.

Unfortunately, treatment can be expensive.  One of the reasons that aggressive treatment works in Canada is that the government provides free healthcare.  In the US, the fastest growing epidemics are typically in low income areas where health insurance is limited.

The antiretroviral medication can also have some unpleasant side effects so many doctors don’t prescribe it until there are signs that their patient’s immune system is compromised.

Vancouver’s approach is also obviously controversial.  Using government funds to provide a place for individuals to inject illegal drugs is going to raise a lot of questions.  Insite was created under a more liberal government and the issue is due to be reviewed by the Canadian supreme court this year.

Root Cause Analysis

ER Wait Leads to Amputation

By ThinkReliability Staff

In some cases, it’s easy to equate “cause” with “blame”.  Sadly that seems to be the case for the family of a 2-year old triple amputee from Sacramento, where a near-certain malpractice suit looms.  The fundamental question in this story is whether or not Malyia Jeffers would have come so close to death had she been diagnosed and treated sooner, upon arriving at the emergency room.

Malyia, bruised, feverish and weak, waited with her family in her local hospital’s emergency room for five hours.  Originally assessed as sick with only a virus and a rash, her parents suspected something more.  Once again a triage nurse reassessed Malyia as non-urgent, with just a virus and rash.  Finally as her small body went limp, her frantic father barged past the ER nurses’ station to demand a second opinion.  That move is probably what saved her life, as blood tests soon confirmed liver failure due to group A streptococcus (GAS).  Two hospital transfers later, Malyia was on life support and blood pressure medication which kept her heart beating and ultimately saved her life.  The lack of oxygen to her limbs however forced doctors to amputate her left hand, fingers on her right hand and both of her lower legs three weeks after her initial infection.

According to the Center for Disease Control, “severe, sometimes life-threatening, GAS disease may occur when bacteria get into parts of the body where bacteria usually are not found, such as the blood, muscle, or the lungs…Streptococcal toxic shock syndrome (STSS) results in a rapid drop in blood pressure and organs (e.g., kidney, liver, lungs) to fail. While 10%-15% of patients with invasive group A streptococcal disease die from their infection, more than 35% with STSS die.”  Doctors know that early diagnosis and treatment are critical with aggressive bacteria such as GAS.  Would Malyia have fared better had she been seen sooner?

Emergency room waiting times have exploded in recent years.  If you were to ask someone on the street why, you might guess that the biggest contributing factor is the growing number of uninsured patients.  Not so, according to an extensive 2009 government report.  Long wait times are actually a symptom of a complex problem.  Vacant hospital beds, specialist availability and access to primary care all play a part in why emergency rooms, especially metropolitan ones, are constantly full.  Using a Cause Map, it is easier to see exactly why.

While Cause Mapping might help us see why ER wait times are a complex issue, it doesn’t alleviate the suffering the Jeffers family has and will face in the months and years to come.   Unfortunately it is tempting to point fingers and place blame.  Yet the reasons behind this tragic cause are not so simple.  Hopefully, process improvements will alleviate the suffering of those stuck waiting in the ER.

More information on the story can be found in the Sacramento Bee.  A 2009 GAO report also provided helpful information on the nation-wide issue of emergency room waiting times.

Root Cause Analysis

Autism & the MMR Vaccine

By ThinkReliability Staff

During most of human history, families and communities feared diseases such as small pox, influenza, tuberculosis.  And rightly so – these scourges were responsible for the deaths of millions.  So with the advent of vaccinations, humanity should have finally been relieved from the worries of these horrible, yet now preventable, diseases.  Unfortunately, despite the widespread acceptance of vaccinations, notable events have set back progress against one particular disease – measles.

Measles, once considered conquered in most of the developed world, is now making resurgence in the United Kingdom.  Why?  Parents fear vaccinating their children.  The Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR) vaccination rate nationwide dropped as low as 84% during the last decade.  Following the drop, measles became more prevalent, infecting thousands after a decade of steep declines.  In fact, measles infection rates are at their highest rates in well over a decade.  Unfortunately, this also coincided with multiple deaths stemming from measles – deaths that were all preventable.

Why the drop in vaccinations?  In this instance, there is clear reason.  A widely-publicized study in 1998 found a correlation between the MMR vaccination, autism and bowel disease.  Any rational parent would fear causing autism in their child, especially when the perceived risk of catching measles was at an all-time low.

What makes this especially disturbing is that the chance of developing autism from receiving an MMR vaccination is…none.  The original study was recently deemed fraudulent and formally retracted.  To create this “study” the lead researcher, Andrew Wakefield, is accused of grossly manipulating data.  One of the longest medical board investigations in UK history found that all 12 cases included in the original study were altered.  Multiple studies which followed showed absolutely no link between the MMR vaccination and autism.  In short, he fabricated the story completely.

Why do such a thing?  To start, Wakefield accepted over £435,000 in compensation.  This pay, provided by a national legal aid fund for the poor, came at the behest of litigators looking to build a case against the makers of the MMR vaccine.  Moreover, Wakefield had various business ventures which would benefit greatly from such a linkage, to the tune of at least £28M per year.

Yet despite overwhelming evidence that the MMR vaccine doesn’t cause autism, perpetually low vaccination rates remain in the UK.  Performing a root cause analysis of the measles epidemic in the UK and building a Cause Map reveals the causes contributing to the problem, including the role Wakefield’s bogus study played.   Medical studies are complex and rely on the integrity and analytic skills of the researchers involved.  Inaccurate conclusions, sensationalism and fraud all can lead to unintended and dangerous consequences.

Click on “Download PDF” to see the Cause Map detailing the drop in UK vaccination rates due to the Wakefield Autism & MMR Study.

(Details of this case were recently published in the British Medical Journal.)

Root Cause Analysis

Wrong Surgery Performed on Patient (Part 2)

By ThinkReliability Staff

This week, we will continue our discussion of an incident where the wrong surgery was performed on a patient.  Last week, we looked at the timeline of events and a process map of the universal protocol developed to reduce the incidence of surgical errors.  This week, we’ll perform a root cause analysis of the issue.

The specific steps identified that didn’t go well, or weren’t performed, from the process map now become causes on our Cause Map.  Instead of the causes or errors being grouped chronologically or by type (as they are on a fishbone diagram), the causes are grouped by their contribution to the incident.  The Cause Map reads from left to right by asking “Why” questions, beginning with the impacts to the goals.

For example, the patient safety goal was impacted because a patient received the wrong surgery.  Why?  Because the physician performed the wrong type of surgery. Why? Because the surgical site was not clearly marked.  Why? It was marked on the correct arm, though not the correct site (the wrong surgery was performed on the correct hand) and the mark was washed off during patient preparations.  These are both issues identified in the process map that did not follow the universal protocol for surgical preparations.  Both of these issues contributed to the wrong surgery.  In addition, the surgeon was thinking about carpal tunnel surgery, since most of his day, especially just prior to the surgery, had been spent on carpal tunnel surgery, either performing it, or doing pre- or post-surgery briefs with other patients.

Neither the patient nor the operating room staff stopped the surgeon from performing the incorrect surgery.  The patient spoke only Spanish, which may have contributed to her not speaking up.  The operating room staff did not include the nurse that had done the patient assessment, due to a last-minute operating room and staff switch due to other delays.  There was no time-out prior to the procedure, which may have alerted the staff about the wrong  procedure, or may have helped the surgeon switch from thinking about carpal tunnel surgery.

Once the analysis is complete, possible solutions are identified on the Cause Map.  Many of the solutions in this case are to ensure that the universal protocol procedures are being followed.  Had they been followed in this case, the risk of performing the wrong surgery would have been reduced.  Many facilities are already using the universal protocol; however, this case study shouldn’t be ignored by them.  The operating surgeon made this case public and added the following comment: “I hope that none of you ever have to go through what my patient and I went through. I no longer see these protocols as a burden. That is the lesson.”

This surgeon has learned his lesson and will likely be more diligent about following these protocols in the future.  However, there’s no need to wait until you, or your staff members, have their own incidents to learn from.  Use this case study to emphasize the needs for these protocols, in hopes that your facility can reduce its own risk.

(Details of this incident were recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine.)