Quite frankly, as a software engineer who works next to a couple medical companies, I won't let automation near me in medical contexts. I've had more than one coworker get hired by a medical device company and peace out a couple months in after seeing their codebase. Stuff like panics on any error that then set morphine pumps to full on. Not the worst way to die, but not the way I want to go...
Technology led a hospital to give a patient 38 times his dosage
51–60 of 68 posts
Re: Technology led a hospital to give a patient 38 times his dosage
#52Hospitals and practitioners are incentivized to never admit they made a mistake. This article is that writ long.
The screen said what would be ordered and did exactly that. The ordering physician did not read the screen. Perhaps the screen could be better but it's not bad. The dosage is bolded.
Someone else reviews it and also doesn't notice the error. I.e. they did a bad job of reviewing.
UCSF staff had turned off notifications and alerts in a very broad manner.
The robot pharmacist gets dragged into this even though it just followed orders, in an article titled "Beware of the Robot Pharmacist". Imagine how long this series would be if the robot had actually made decisions.
At one point a nurse asks the juvenile patient if he thinks 38 pills is too much. In movies, asking a child for advice is the comic low point where we are meant to realize the adult is incompetent. This nurse kept her job.
Hospitals are incredibly political environments and this article goes out of its way to keep everyone's hands clean. But at the end of the day multiple people made mistakes and the author just decides to blame everyone's new favorite boogie man "technology".
Having seen hundreds of incident reports, I assure you that most hospital issues are caused by people making mistakes and/or not following procedures. And all signs point to that being the case here.
What would have been more helpful is if the author would have followed his own conclusion, and centered and titled the articles around it:
"Safe organizations relentlessly promote a “stop the line” culture, in which every employee knows that she must speak up — not only when she’s sure that something is wrong, but also when she’s not sure it’s right. Organizations that create such a culture do so by focusing on it relentlessly and seeing it as a central job of leaders. No one should ever have to worry about looking dumb for speaking up, whether she’s questioning a directive from a senior surgeon or an order in the computer."
Perhaps if medical leaders stopped pretending that they always do everything perfect - i.e. the opposite of this literally CEO approved article - people further down the ladder would feel they could also be honest.
Re: Technology led a hospital to give a patient 38 times his dosage
#53It's a poorly designed interface, but the real problem, IMO is that the nurse didn't double check with somebody before giving the kid 38 of the same pill. A dose like that just doesn't make sense, she should have known better.
The fact that 38 pills were ordered shows how crazy the problems can get, but a crazy number of pills like that should also be pretty trivial for a nurse to catch. How do you pour 38 pills down an 85-pound child's throat without considering that the consequence may be death?
Re: Technology led a hospital to give a patient 38 times his dosage
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Medication errors are common enough that they happen on a regular basis in any reasonably sized hospital. They happen both with or without electronic systems. The majority of errors are caught — by the prescriber, by the pharmacist, or by the nurse administering — but a few fall through the cracks. Order of magnitude errors, where the dose is x10^n the intended dose are some of the more common errors. We have a lot o…
Order of magnitude errors aren't that hard, it is improbable that a hospital will need to prescribe enough drugs for a small horse. Doctors seem to run too much on autopilot, they leave discretion to laboratories who give recommended ranges for various hormones/vitamins/chemicals in the blood. I won't disagree that medicine is hard, but this looks like a UX design flaw, the UX should factor in drug company recommenda…
Weight range in children's hospitals ranges from 100s of grams to 100s of kilos - that's three orders of magnitude right there.
> Doctors seem to run too much on autopilot, they leave discretion to laboratories who give recommended ranges for various hormones/vitamins/chemicals in the blood.
Both population biochemistry and laboratory assays vary between hospitals and labs. So it's actually really important that we interpret biochemical results in relation to the normal ranges provided to us by the lab. Also, those normal ranges are not just set by the lab without thought, there are pathologists and clinical chemists involved in the process.
I think we think about these numbers a whole lot more than you think we think about them.
Re: Technology led a hospital to give a patient 38 times his dosage
#55There's a book from the 70s called Technology and Social Shock that my father, a research scientist at NIST (one of the US national labs), gifted to me recently. Given this crazy Internet rabbit hole that I've made the big thing in my life, I think the hidden message is to be careful and to take the time to consider the negative consequences of the "cool stuff" we're working on and giving out to the world on this new…
That does sound really interesting. Couldn't find it on Amazon just by the title. Who is the author or authors?
Re: Technology led a hospital to give a patient 38 times his dosage
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Order of magnitude errors aren't that hard, it is improbable that a hospital will need to prescribe enough drugs for a small horse. Doctors seem to run too much on autopilot, they leave discretion to laboratories who give recommended ranges for various hormones/vitamins/chemicals in the blood. I won't disagree that medicine is hard, but this looks like a UX design flaw, the UX should factor in drug company recommenda…
> Order of magnitude errors aren't that hard, it is improbable that a hospital will need to prescribe enough drugs for a small horse. Weight range in children's hospitals ranges from 100s of grams to 100s of kilos - that's three orders of magnitude right there. > Doctors seem to run too much on autopilot, they leave discretion to laboratories who give recommended ranges for various hormones/vitamins/chemicals in the…
Re: Technology led a hospital to give a patient 38 times his dosage
#57Cliff notes-- New EMR/ordering system. New physician. New nurse. New pharmacy dispensing system. The physician couldn't order 160mg of Bactrim because per kg dosing was required. They mistakenly ordered 160 "mg/kg" (40x the intended dose of 4mg/kg) on the order screen. The UX on the screen was partly to blame-- dosing mg or mg/kg apparently came down to a just a dropbox. With EMR ordering systems I've used, this mist…
> The physician couldn't order 160mg of Bactrim because per kg dosing was required. Not quite. The article suggested that, yes, they could have ordered it in just mg. But they needed to change a dropdown from "mg/kg" to "mg", which is easily overlooked.
Re: Technology led a hospital to give a patient 38 times his dosage
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have had docs prescribe med combos (same doc, same visit) that would have resulted in permanent damage or death if not caught. Luckily we have three people check all my other half’s meds before she takes them. She does an FDA search and checks drug/drug interactions. I do one independently and her father, idk what he does, but he’s actually an oncologist so presumably better than our checks. (Outpatient) Too many clo…
Well on the outpatient side, the volume of drugs a doctor is prescribing is horrendously outpaced by the number of order you're getting as a hospitalist. When you are responsible for about a dozen patients and some need your attention NOW, it's not feasible to do a complete drug-drug interaction check. But that's where A) the modern EHR that has been invested into it by the healthcare system to build drug-drug intera…
Re: Technology led a hospital to give a patient 38 times his dosage
#59This horribly written series of articles should be titled "How technology could not prevent a hospital from giving a patient 38 times his dosage". - The system's dosage caps were disabled - The dosage was never double checked since "technology is so accurate", ignoring people still make mistakes when using it - Vast swaths of alerts are regularly ignored rather than fixed resulting in them being ignored But more than…
> But more than anything already listed... the nurse didn't question giving someone 38 pills beyond "must be dilluted" yet the article pushes the focus to how technology led to the error? The nurse did question it further. I feel as though the articles addressed this and your subsequent point pretty adequately. > Since the Paleolithic Era, we humans have concocted explanations for stuff we don’t quite understand: tid…
Is any other line here actually relevant to technology or just how errors end up occurring even though you have resilient systems and checks built in? I.e. what about any of those has to do with technology itself?
Re: Technology led a hospital to give a patient 38 times his dosage
#60This horribly written series of articles should be titled "How technology could not prevent a hospital from giving a patient 38 times his dosage". - The system's dosage caps were disabled - The dosage was never double checked since "technology is so accurate", ignoring people still make mistakes when using it - Vast swaths of alerts are regularly ignored rather than fixed resulting in them being ignored But more than…
The point you may have failed to get is that hospitals rely on systems for catching errors (which is hard because medicine is super hard). The point Wachler attempts to raise is how when we blindly substitute technological systems with human based processes we can miss the mark if we're not extra careful. Very important as we think about replacing human effort with that of robots (think Tesla vs. Toyota in how they m…
This isn't limited to us now using technological systems for steps. Unless you're arguing the portion of the article covering how the same errors used to happen more often before the system was put in place is incorrect.
Fixing ALL false alerts is an impractical goal but lowering them to something reasonable to work with day to day is not. Epic is a complex system and a medical system but that doesn't mean every change involves you going to the government, a great deal of it can be customized with local Epic trained staff you were mandated to have when you bought the product. Doesn't make it easy but the majority of the problem is within the organization not the government or vendor.
Anyway my overall disagreement with the article isn't that I think the technology is perfect rather it's written like it's worse than it was before because of the technology when it even admits things are better than before because of the technology. It did little to convince me technology led a hospital to do anything vs the same problems the hospital has always had with it's verification procedures.