Tag Archives: Root Cause Analysis

Root Cause

Manifestation of Poor Glycemic Control Part 3

By ThinkReliability Staff

In previous blogs, we wrote about nonketotic hyperosmolar coma and diabetic ketoacidosis, which are both conditions related to hyperglycemia, or high blood glucose.  In this blog, we consider the last type of manifestation of poor glycemic control that, when it occurs in the hospital, is considered a hospital-acquired condition by Medicare & Medicaid, meaning that hospitals will not receive additional payment for cases when this condition is acquired during hospitalization.  Hypogelycemic coma, along with nonketotic hyperosmolar coma and diabetic ketoacidosis, results from poor glycemic control within the hospital, but is caused by low blood glucose.

As we did with the other two manifestations of poor glycemic control, we can look at the impacted goals for a hospital and the potential causes and solutions for this condition in a visual root cause analysis or Cause Map.  The goals for hypoglycemic coma are the same to the other manifestations of poor glycemic control and include increased risk of patient death, length of patient stay and treatment needs.  The costs associated with hypoglycemic coma (greater than $7 million in the US from the 212 cases reported to CMS in 2007) are no longer reimbursable when the condition is acquired in the hospital.  There is also always the potential that a patient death can result in a second victim – the patient’s provider(s).

Hypoglycemic coma results from uncontrolled hypoglycemia, which can result from overtreatment with insulin, drug-induced hypoglycemia, drug interaction with insulin, decreased glucose production and/or loss of glucose.  Overtreatment with insulin was implicated in 90% of hypoglycemia cases in a recent study and can result from medication errors (see our analysis on medication errors in hospital settings),  or a failure to adjust insulin for diet or other factors.  Drug-induced hypoglycemia can result from administration of fluoroquinolones (the mechanism for this effect is unknown) and/or inadequate nutrition.  Drugs that interact with insulin may be administered to a diabetic patient if providers are lacking in knowledge about glycemic control.  Underlying disease or infection, such as chronic renal insufficiency, which was implicated in approximately 50% of hypoglycemia cases in the study, can result in decreased glucose production or loss of glucose.

As with the other types of manifestations of poor glycemic control, efforts must be made to prevent these types of incidents.  As suggested with hyperglycemic events, insulin plans should be individualized, accounting for all relevant factors related to glycemic control and diet.  Patients treated with insulin in the hospital should have their blood glucose levels monitored frequently, especially as insulin has been identified as a High-alert medication by The Joint Commission.   Any patients found unconscious should also immediately have their blood glucose levels measured.  Patient’s nutritional intake must be carefully monitored, especially for cases involving medications that might cause hypoglycemia.  Last but not least, controls and procedures involving drugs given to diabetic patients should be carefully controlled, due to the high potential and risk for interaction with insulin.

Two other conditions are considered hospital-acquired manifestations of poor glycemic control: nonketotic hyperosmolar coma and diabetic ketoacidosis.   In previous blogs, we discussed the causes of these issues, and suggested solutions to reduce the risk of these types of incidents.

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

Root Cause

Manifestation of Poor Glycemic Control Part 2

By ThinkReliability Staff

In a previous blog, we discussed how poor glycemic control can result in hyperglycemia which could lead to nonketotic hyperosmolar coma.  Diabetic ketoacidosis, if resulting from poor glycemic control within a hospital setting, is another hospital-acquired condition as determined by Medicare & Medicaid, meaning that hospitals will not receive additional payment for cases when this condition is acquired during hospitalization.  Like nonketotic hyperosmolar coma, diabetic ketoacidosis can have a significant impact on patient safety and can be investigated within a Cause Map, or a visual root cause analysis.

The impacted goals for a hospital resulting from hospital-acquired diabetic ketoacidosis are very similar to those for nonketotic hyperosmolar coma.  Patient safety is impacted due to an increased risk of death, which can also result in a provider being a “second victim.  This is a “no-pay” hospital acquired condition, which is estimated to cost $42,974 per case.  According to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), in 2007 there were 11,469 cases of hospital-acquired diabetic ketoacidosis, resulting in a total cost to the healthcare system of almost half a billion dollars.

According to a study  published in the International Journal for Quality in Health Care, diabetic emergencies, including nonketotic hyperosmolar coma,  increases the risk of patient death (from 9% to 16%),  length of patient stay (from 7 to 14 days) and treatment requirements.  The costs associated with nonketotic hyperosmolar coma (greater than $114 million in the US in 2007, according to CMS) are no longer reimbursable when the condition is acquired in the hospital.  Additionally, patient death due to hospital-acquired conditions can result in a second   victim – the healthcare provider(s).  Additionally, this diagnosis results in increased stay and treatment requirements.

Beginning with the impacted goals and asking “Why” questions, we quickly determine that diabetic ketoacidosis, like nonketotic hyperosmolar coma, results from uncontrolled hyperglycemia.  Rather than perform the same analysis of causes of hyperglycemia (which, if we’re doing our job right, should result in the same cause-and-effect relationships), we can link to the analysis shown in our previous blog.   However, for diabetic ketoacidosis, we also have a cause of dehydration.  Since this was not a cause previously analyzed, we will add to this portion of the Cause Map.

Patient dehydration can result from a medication that increases fluid loss, an underlying medical condition, or inadequate water intake.  Inadequate water intake can result from a patient’s limited access to water, such as a patient who is bedridden and is not provided adequate water from a caregiver, or the patient feels too ill to drink, or the patient is unable to drink, due to incapacitation, confusion, restraints or sedation.  A combination of these causes may also occur.

Because of the importance of preventing these conditions resulting from hyperglycemia and dehydration, every effort should be made to prevent these outcomes from occurring.

Two other conditions are considered hospital-acquired manifestations of poor glycemic control, diabetic ketoacidosis and hypoglycemic coma.  In future blogs, we will discuss the causes of these issues, and suggested solutions to reduce the risk of these types of incidents.  It is recommended that an individualized insulin plan be used, rather than a sliding scale, to ensure blood glucose levels are kept at or below 110 mg/dL.  A specific glycemic management team, which carefully coordinates medical nutritional therapy with insulin control, can also reduce the risk of glycemic events.  Patients who are found to have an insulin deficiency should be treated with intravenous insulin.

Because 20-30% of diabetic ketoacidosis cases are estimated to be the initial presentation of previously undiagnosed diabetes, some experts recommend testing the glucose levels of all children who have not been diagnosed with diabetes, and all patients who are vomiting or require intravenous hydration.  To reduce the risk of dehydration, patient’s fluid intake should be tracked and any patients who are unable to  drink should have intravenous fluids.

Nonketotic hyperosmolar coma and diabetic ketoacidosis are two hospital-acquired events that result from hyperglycemia.  The remaining hospital-acquired manifestation of poor glycemic control, hypoglycemic coma, will be covered in a future blog.

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

Root Cause

Manifestation of Poor Glycemic Control Part 1

By ThinkReliability Staff

Nonketotic hyperosmolar coma resulting from poor glycemic control within a hospital setting is now considered a hospital-acquired condition by Medicare & Medicaid, meaning that hospitals will not receive additional  payment for cases when this condition is acquired during hospitalization.  Because of the severity of the impact of this condition, its implications and causes should be carefully studied to determine ways to reduce the risk of this condition being acquired during a hospital stay.

We can look at the impacted goals for a hospital and the potential causes for this condition, in a visual root cause analysis or Cause Map.  To perform a Cause Mapping analysis, we will first determine the impacts of a given condition on an organization’s goals, then develop cause-and-effect relationships to diagram the causes that result in the condition.

According to a study published in the International Journal for Quality in Health Care, diabetic emergencies, including nonketotic hyperosmolar coma,  increases the risk of patient death (from 9% to 16%),  length of patient stay (from 7 to 14 days) and treatment requirements.  The costs associated with nonketotic hyperosmolar coma (greater than $114 million in the US in 2007, according to CMS) are no longer reimbursable when the condition is acquired in the hospital.  Additionally, patient death due to hospital-acquired conditions can result in a second victim – the healthcare provider(s).

To analyze this issue, we begin with an impacted goal and ask “Why” questions.  In this case, we are looking at the impact to the patient safety goal becaue of the  increased risk of patient death due to nonketotic hyperosmolar coma, which is caused by uncontrolled hyperglycemia (high blood glucose).   Associated infection, medication that interferes with glucose absorption, and insulin deficiency can all contribute to hyperglycemia.  Insufficient knowledge of providers about glycemic control can result in diabetic patients being given medications that interfere with glucose absorption, or in inadequate control of diabetes with insulin in the hospital setting.

The study referenced above also found that insufficient staffing, which may result in insufficient backups/checks of staff, use of workarounds, and ineffective communication between the team, leading to insufficient tracking of glycemic control.    Providers may also be unaware of a patient’s diabetic status, due to poor record keeping or communication.   Inadequate insulin therapy can also contribute to hyperglycemia.  Specifically, medication errors involving insulin (see our medication error Cause Map), fear of hypoglycemia (which may result in fear of aggressive insulin therapy), and  failure to adjust insulin for diet or other factors, including age, renal failure, liver disease, can result in an all too common “one size fits all” linear sliding insulin scale providing inadequate results.

Two other conditions are considered hospital-acquired manifestations of poor glycemic control, diabetic ketoacidosis and hypoglycemic coma.  In future blogs, we will discuss the causes of these issues, and suggested solutions to reduce the risk of these types of incidents.

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

Root Cause

Contaminated Injections Kill 5

By ThinkReliability Staff

At least 35 patients have come down with rare fungal meningitis after an injection they received for back pain was contaminated with fungus. Five have died so far. Because of the severity of the disease and the long incubation period, more cases – and more deaths – are expected in the coming months.

We can examine the issues related to the fungal meningitis in a Cause Map, or visual root cause analysis. Documenting the causes visually can make a complex medical issue easier to understand. We begin with the impacts to the goals. The deaths and severe sickness are an impact to the patient safety goal. While we begin with the known cases, these numbers can be updated if more cases are discovered. The compounding company which prepared the injections has voluntarily surrendered its license, an impact to the compliance goal and has recalled 3 lots of the drug used in the injection (methylprednisolone acetate), which can be considered an impact to both the organizational and property goal. The extremely difficult treatment ahead of these patients (estimated to take months) is an impact to the patient services and labor goal. The contamination of the injection itself can be considered an environmental goal.

Once we have captured these impacted goals, we can begin with the focus of our investigation – the patient safety goal – and ask “why” questions to develop the cause-and-effect relationships that resulted in the disease. The patient deaths and sickness are due to contraction of fungal meningitis. These patients came down with fungal meningitis because fungus was introduced to their nervous system. The injections that the patients received for back pain were injected epidurally, which allows access to the nervous system, and were infected with aspergillus, a common fungi. More testing is being done to determine whether the contamination was in the drug within the injection, or the numbing agent or antiseptic wipes being used. Due to the widespread (across several states) outbreak, it is believed that the drug within the injection is to blame, but because of the seriousness of this issue, all potential causes are being carefully tested.

Because the drug used in the injection was compounded, the contamination could have occurred within a raw ingredient used in the compounding, or it could have become contaminated during the compounding process. The source of the outbreak is not yet known, but because compounded drugs and compounding companies receive less oversight than drug manufacturers, it is suspected that the contaminant was introduced during the compounding process.

Initial symptoms of fungal meningitis are subtle, including headache, fever, dizziness, nausea and slurred speech. The symptoms can take up to a month from introduction of the fungus to appear. If patients have received a shot for back pain, they should contact their doctor to see if it was from the infected lot. Early and immediate treatment is important.

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

 

Root Cause

More Known About Why A Donated Kidney Was Trashed

By ThinkReliability Staff

In a previous blog, we wrote about a donated kidney that was accidentally thrown out rather than being transplanted.  We began the root cause analysis investigation with the information that was available, but there were still a lot of open questions.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has released a report on the incident, which provides additional information we can use to update our Cause Map.  We can update all areas of the investigation, including updating any additional goals that were found to be impacted.  In this case, three employees had been placed on administrative leave.  Since the time of the previous blog, four employees have had their careers impacted – one has resigned, one has been fired, one has had a title removed, and another has since returned from paid administrative leave.  Additionally, there is a risk that the hospital may be removed from the Medicare program, another impact to the compliance goal.

The report provides more specific causes, and evidence, regarding the incident.  We know now that the kidney, which was to be transplanted, was instead thrown in a hopper by the circulating nurse.  We can ask “Why” questions to add more detail.  The kidney was thrown in the hopper because the contents of the slush machine were thrown in the hopper and the kidney was in the slush machine.  It still isn’t clear why the kidney was in the slush machine in the donor’s operating room (rather than being transferred immediately to the recipient’s room), but more information regarding the disposal is now available.

The nurse disposed of the hopper because she was unaware that  the slush machine contained the kidney.  The nurse had been on lunch break when the location of the kidney was announced and was not briefed on the status of the operation upon her return.  There was no documentation on where the kidney was located, and the nurse assumed that it was in the recipient’s room.  For reasons that are unclear (as it is usually the job of the technician who is responsible for the machine), the nurse decided to empty the slush machine while the operation was still ongoing.  This appeared to be against procedure, but the procedure had “exceptions” according to staff, and was ineffective in this case.  The technician that was responsible for the slush machine was exerting inadequate control, as the staff members have stated that no one noticed the nurse empting the slush machine.  This also demonstrates inadequate control of the kidney, since there appeared to be no staff person responsible for the kidney itself.

Since the incident, the hospital has developed a procedure for intra-operative hand-off, which includes a briefing requirement for staff members who enter an operating room mid-procedure.  Additionally, clarification has been provided that nothing will leave an operating room until the patient has left, post-procedure.  Although the transplant program is still shutdown pending investigation, a recommendation that might reduce this type of problem in the future would be to ensure that a staff member is designated as responsible for any donated organs from removal to transplant.

To view the updated Cause Map and potential solutions, please click “Download PDF” above

Root Cause Analysis

Safe Use of Opioids in Inpatient Hospitals

By ThinkReliability Staff

The use of opioids for pain relief in inpatient hospitals can lead to serious potential adverse effects, including respiratory depression and drug interaction.  On August 8, 2012, The Joint Commission published a Sentinel Event Alert: “Safe use of opioids in hospitals”.  The alert contains information about potential causes of the adverse effects possible with the use of opioids as well as solutions that, if implemented by healthcare facilities, can reduce the risk of patient safety impacts from the use of opioids.

We can present the information provided by The Joint Commission in a Cause Map, or visual root cause analysis.  We begin with the impacts to the goals.  In this case, we look specifically at two potential impacts to the patient safety goal – the risk of drug-drug interactions and respiratory depression involving opioids.

Drug-drug interactions can result when a patient is taking another drug that interacts with opioids. In this case, the provider prescribing the opioid is unaware of the potential interaction between the drugs prescribed or is unaware of the patient’s drug history, because a complete history is unavailable and a patient is either unable or unwilling to provide a compete list. While drug-drug interactions are possible with any level of opioid, the over-use of opioids for pain relief is a particular concern.  Opioids can be effectively used for pain relief, but over-use can occur when a high dose is needed to manage pain, either due to tolerance from chronic conditions or patient abuse, or obesity.  Studies have shown that obese patients may require more opioids for pain relief than would be suggested by their weight alone.  A patient receiving the wrong dose of opioids (besides being an issue in itself) can also contribute.  Issues have been raised regarding the difficulty in calculating doses with drugs of different potency, especially as patients move from one drug to another.  Additionally, prescribing dose based on weight alone can result in a higher or lower dose than needed as the proper dose of opioids is subject to patient weight, age, sex, and tolerance level.

Issues with prescribing the wrong dose or wrong type of medication can occur when a patient or family member is responsible for the administration.  Problems with medication administered by a provider typically occur around changes of the type or delivery method of the pain killer.  Special care should be taken to recalculate the dose  corresponding to any change in the drug dosage, type or delivery method.  Similar-looking bottles and similar-sounding names are always a potential pitfall in proper drug administration and special care should always be taken in these cases.

Opioids reduce respiratory rate, which can result in respiratory depression.  Respiratory depression can be impacted by other factors, such as a patient who is sleeping (most respiratory depression occurs during typical sleeping hours), or who is already pre-disposed to respiratory depression.  This most commonly occurs with post-surgical patients (who may have residual anesthesia), old or young patients (who may be affected more greatly by the respiratory effects), patients who have abnormal respiratory control due to obstructive sleep apnea or morbid obesity, patients with supplemental oxygen and patients who have a self-administered drug delivery system, such as a fentanyl patch.  Special care and monitoring should be taken with patients who have a higher risk level for respiratory depression.

However, monitoring for respiratory depression is difficult.  Visually assessing respiratory depression (especially while a patient is sleeping or on supplemental oxygen) is extremely difficult.  Using pulse oximetry can result in misleading values (including normal values while a patient is suffering from respiratory depression) and high false alarms.  Because respiratory depression occurs gradually, intermittent monitoring may not be sufficient to pick up on a patient’s decline.

There is no one-size-fits-all solution for reducing respiratory depression.  Rather, an individualized plan based on patient pain requirements and risk factors is shown to be the recommended way to reduce the risk of respiratory depression and ensure proper pain control for patients.

To view the Cause Map and recommended solutions, please click “Download PDF” above.  Or learn more from The Joint Commission Sentinel Event Alert.

Root Cause Analysis

Working to Eradicate A Painful Parasite

By Kim Smiley

The lifecycle of the Guinea worm is the stuff of nightmares.  This parasite is ingested by a host as larvae, mate and mature inside the host and then the adult female painfully emerges to lay her eggs. The adult female is between two to three feet long and the thickness of a spaghetti noodle.  The only way to get rid of the parasite is to wrap it around a stick and slowly pull it out, a process that takes several weeks or even months.

Individuals who are infected by this parasite can suffer for months, making it difficult to work and feed their families.  There is no immunity to Guinea worms so it’s possible for people to suffer year after year if they continue to ingest the larvae of the Guinea worms.  There is also no drug to treat Guinea worm disease and there is no vaccine that prevents infections.

But there is hope in the fight against this excruciating disease.  The number of cases of Guinea worm disease has decreased dramatically.  In 1986 there were an estimated 3.5 million cases of Guinea worm disease spread across 21 countries in Asia and Africa.  In 2011, there were only 1,058 reported cases of Guinea worm disease in four African countries.

How was this possible?  The first step in answering that question is to understand more about the disease.  The problem of Guinea worm disease can be illustrated by building a Cause Map, an intuitive root cause analysis format.  By asking “Why” questions, causes can be added to the Cause Map and the problem can be analyzed.    Why are people getting the disease?  People are drinking water that is contaminated with copepods, also called water fleas, which are infested with larvae of Guinea worms.  There is also typically no other supply of safe drinking water and the water wasn’t treated or filtered prior to consumption.

Painful blisters form when the female Guinea worm emerges from the body and people put their sores into the same water used for drinking (because it is usually the only water available) to help relieve the burning sensation.   The female Guinea worm then releases hundreds of thousands of guinea worm larvae once she senses water.  Guinea worm larvae is eaten by the water fleas.  The infected water fleas are small and ingested along with the water, which restarts the whole process.

This process had been going on for thousands of years, affecting millions and millions of people.  Its remains have even been found in Egyptian mummies.  But simple changes have nearly eliminated the disease.  In fact, Guinea worm disease is predicted to be the first human disease ever eradicated without a vaccine and only human disease to be eradicated other than small-pox.

Relatively simple changes have made all the difference in the world.  People were educated about how to prevent the disease.  Millions of straws with filters were handed out to villagers to strain out the infected water fleas and prevent the parasite from entering the body.  Efforts were also made to treat water with larvicide and provide access to uncontaminated drinking water.

Without new hosts, the Guinea worm larvae died.  Once the lifecycle was broken, the disease disappeared from many regions.  There are now only four countries that reported any cases of the disease last year, the vast number being in war torn South Sudan where public health efforts have been difficult to sustain.

Click on “Download PDF” above to view a high level Cause Map of this issue

Root Cause Analysis

Donated Kidney Trashed

By ThinkReliability Staff

On August 10, 2012, a living donor’s kidney was thrown out, instead of being transplanted as planned.  The incident was chalked up to “human error”, which is almost certainly part of the problem . . . but definitely not all of it.

This extremely rare, but serious, event is being analyzed by several oversight agencies, as well as a contractor hired by the medical center in Ohio where the event took place, to ensure that needed improvements are identified and put into place so this type of incident doesn’t happen again.  We can examine the currently known information in a visual root cause analysis, or Cause Map.  To do so, we begin with the impacted goals.

There are many goals that were impacted as a result of this error.  Firstly, the patient safety goal was impacted because the patient did not receive the transplanted kidney.  This can also be considered an impact to the patient services goal.  Three personnel from the hospital were placed on administrative leave as a result of the incident.  This results in an impact to employees.  The compliance goal is impacted because this event has resulted in a review by several oversight agencies.  The living kidney donor program is currently shut down for review, which can be considered an impact to the organization goal.  The kidney was disposed of improperly, which is an impact to the environmental goal.  (Medical waste has strict requirements for disposal.)   The loss of the donated kidney can be considered an impact to the property goal.  Personnel time was taken both to attempt to resuscitate the kidney and to participate in an independent review of the donor program.  These can both be considered impacts to the labor/time goal.

Once we have determined the impacts to the goals, we can ask “Why” questions to develop the cause-and-effect relationships that led to these impacts.  In this case, the patient did not receive a kidney transplant because the kidney was thrown out and because of concern about the kidney’s viability.  Part of this concern was the delay in actually finding the kidney, likely due to the fact that it was disposed of improperly.  The reason given by the medical center for the disposal of the kidney is “human error”.  However, there is ordinarily a support system involved in organ transplants that would minimize these types of errors.  Certainly the fact that the program has been stopped and three employees – at least one of whom was not directly involved in the transplant operation – were placed on administrative leave suggest that the organization is looking at more than just a screw-up by one person acting alone.

Specifically, the investigation should look at communication – was the nurse who disposed of the organ told it was destined for transplant?  Was there a surgical time-out immediately prior to the removal with the entire operating team that discussed the plan for the kidney?  Also the training and preparation of the surgical team should be investigated.  Had the team been properly trained and prepped for this type of surgery?  The fact that it was done frequently at this facility doesn’t mean that adequate training was in place.  What about the procedure for treatment and supervision of donated organs?  Donated organs have to be treated in a very particular way to ensure their viability for the transplant patient.  Who, if anyone, was responsible for ensuring that the organ was prepared in a proper way for transplant?  Were they involved in the surgical time-out?  Lastly, because an error was made with the disposal procedure, the procedure, training and communication regarding disposal of medical waste needs to be analyzed to ensure it is adequate. The hope is that by doing a thorough review – and improvement – of policies, procedures, training and communication at the facility, it will not only reduce the risk of this type of error, but provide improvement in many other aspects of the care provided as well.

To view the Outline and Cause Map, please click “Download PDF” above.

Root Cause Analysis

Possible Link Between Antibiotics and Obesity

By Kim Smiley

A study recently published in the International Journal of Obesity found that infants given antibiotics before six months of age were 22 % more likely to be overweight between the ages of 10 months and 3 years.  Researchers believe this may be because the natural balance of bacteria in their digestive tracts is altered by the antibiotics.

Obesity has long been assumed to be a matter of too much food into the body while too few calories are burned, but new studies. including the recent one finding a link between use of antibiotics early in life and body weight later in childhood,  are suggesting that the issue may be more complicated than it appears on the surface.

Scientists are still studying how bacteria in human digestive tracts affect how the body processes food, but many researchers believe that the balance of bacteria plays a role in how the body absorbs calories.  The amount of calories that a body absorbs from the same amount of identical food may not be a constant.  More studies are needed to understand the relationship between bacteria in the gut and body weight, but studies done so far are intriguing.

The link between antibiotics and higher body mass remained even when researchers controlled for factors such as what the baby ate, the weight of a baby’s parents, whether the mother smoked while pregnant, and the family’s socioeconomic status.  Researchers did note that the study found an association and not a cause-effect link and that further studies are needed, but there seems to be a relationship between how antibiotics affect the body and body mass.

More research is needed to fully understand this issue, but this study is an interesting step to better understanding the causes of childhood obesity.  On the downloadable PDF, we have created a Cause Map, or visual root cause analysis, to show the possible cause-and-effect relationships between use of antibotics in early enfancy and childhood obesity.

In this specific study used to build this example, the researchers were quick to point out that infants should be given antibiotics if they are needed, but it’s important to understand how the medication may be affecting bodies, especially very young bodies.

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

Root Cause Analysis

At Least 31 Patients Contracted Hepatitis C

by Kim Smiley

Testing is still ongoing, but at least 31 people have contracted hepatitis C from contaminated syringes at a New Hampshire cardiac catheterization lab.  A previous blog discussed the outbreak when it was initially announced that four patients who had used the same cardiac catheterization lab had tested positive for the same strain of hepatitis C, but more information has been released and the Cause Map should be updated to incorporate all the relevant details.  One of the strengths of a Cause Map, a visual root cause analysis, is that it can be updated relatively quickly to document important information as it becomes available.  In this example, investigators are continuing to work to understand the issues involved, but two new significant pieces of information should be added to the Cause Map.

The source of the hepatitis C has been determined by investigators.  Investigators found that a medical technician with hepatitis C contaminated syringes that were then used on patients.  The medical technician is a drug addict who used the syringes because they were filled with Fentanyl, an anesthetic far more powerful than morphine.  Hepatitis C is spread through blood to blood contact so syringes contained with hepatitis C are a major health hazard that are capable of spreading the disease. The syringes were not secured so he was able to attain them.  He then used them, refilled them with saline or another liquid and replaced them without any other member of the staff noticing.

Investigators have also learned that the medical technician responsible for the contamination has worked in 18 hospitals in seven other states during the last 10 years.  It’s not known when the medical technician contracted hepatitis C, but investigators believe he had a positive test for hepatitis C in June 2010.  This means that the investigation needs to be expanded and that many more people may need to be tested.

This article contains information about what facilities the medical technician worked at and the timeline for his employment.  To view an updated high level “Cause Map”, click here.