Comparison of active versus passive surveillance adverse event reporting in a paediatric ambulatory chiropractic care setting: a cluster randomised controlled trial

Katherine A Pohlman, Linda Carroll, Ross T Tsuyuki, Lisa Hartling, Sunita Vohra, Katherine A Pohlman, Linda Carroll, Ross T Tsuyuki, Lisa Hartling, Sunita Vohra

Abstract

Objectives: This pragmatic, cluster, stratified randomised controlled trial (RCT) compared the quantity and quality of adverse event (AE) reports after chiropractic manual therapy in children less than 14 years of age, using active versus passive surveillance reporting systems.

Method: Data were collected between November 2014 and July 2017 from 60 consecutive paediatric patient visits to participating chiropractors. Those allocated to active surveillance collected AE information with three paper-based questionnaires (two from patients, one from chiropractors) to identify any new or worsening symptoms after treatment. Passive surveillance involved AE information reported by chiropractors on a web-based system. To assess quality of reporting, AE reports greater than mild were reviewed by content experts. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of AE reports in active versus passive surveillance.

Results: Ninety-six chiropractors agreed to participate and enrolled in the study: 34 chiropractors in active surveillance with 1894 patient visits from 1179 unique patients and 35 chiropractors in passive surveillance with 1992 patient visits from 1363 unique patients. In the active arm, AEs were reported in 8.8% (n=140, 95% CI 6.72% to 11.18%) of patients/caregivers, compared with 0.1% (n=2, 95% CI 0.02% to 0.53%) in the passive arm (p<0.001). The quality of AE reports was not evaluated because the five AE reports reviewed by the content experts were determined to be of mild severity.

Conclusion: We found that active surveillance resulted in significantly more AE reports than passive surveillance. Further prospective active surveillance research studies should be conducted with children receiving chiropractic manual therapy to understand mechanisms and risk factors for moderate and severe AEs, and to further explore how and when to solicit patient safety information.

Keywords: Adverse events; Patient safety; Randomised controlled trial; epidemiology and detection.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT flow diagram of participants in this cluster randomised trial.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Total number of AE reports by symptom, severity (mildˆ- solid; moderateˆˆ/severeˆˆˆ - dotted pattern) and age groups. ˆ Mild: the AE required self-care only (no further treatment sought/needed). ˆˆ Moderate: temporary limitation of age-appropriate activities of daily living (n=24), care was sought from a medical doctor (n=7), or both temporary limitation of age-appropriate activities of daily living and care was sought from a medical doctor (n=24). ˆˆˆ severe: limitation in self-care (eg, bathing, eating, dressing) (n=24) or need for urgent medical assessment (n=0). *- other symptoms reported by parent/caregiver: balance, blocked tear duck/eye blinking, eye pain, hoarseness, daytime enuresis, speech. AE, adverse event.

References

    1. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington DC 2000.
    1. Mitchell I, Schuster A, Smith K, et al. . Patient safety incident reporting: a qualitative study of thoughts and perceptions of experts 15 years after 'To Err is Human'. BMJ Qual Saf 2016;25:92–9. 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004405
    1. Safety I of M (US) C on DS for P Patient safety: achieving a new standard for care. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US), 2004.
    1. Errors C on I and PM, Aspden P, Wolcott J, et al. . Preventing medication errors: quality chasm series. The Naitonal Academies Press, 2007.
    1. Christensen MG, Hyland JK, Goertz CM, et al. . Practice analysis of chiropractic 2015. Greeley, CO: National Board of Chiropractic Examiners, 2015.
    1. Pohlman KA, Hondras MA, Long CR, et al. . Practice patterns of doctors of chiropractic with a pediatric diplomate: a cross-sectional survey. BMC Complement Altern Med 2010;10:26. 10.1186/1472-6882-10-26
    1. Ndetan H, Evans MW, Hawk C, et al. . Chiropractic or osteopathic manipulation for children in the United States: an analysis of data from the 2007 National health interview survey. J Altern Complement Med 2012;18:347–53. 10.1089/acm.2011.0268
    1. Vohra S, Johnston BC, Cramer K, et al. . Adverse events associated with pediatric spinal manipulation: a systematic review. Pediatrics 2007;119:e275–83. 10.1542/peds.2006-1392
    1. Corso M, Cancelliere C, Mior S, et al. . The safety of spinal manipulative therapy in children under 10 years: a rapid review. Chiropr Man Therap 2020;28:12. 10.1186/s12998-020-0299-y
    1. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. . Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009;42:377–81. 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010
    1. Field MJ, Behrman RE. Understanding and Agreeing to Children’s Participation in Clinical Research. National Academies Press, 2004.
    1. Pohlman KA, O’Beirne M, Thiel H, et al. . Development and validation of providers’ and patients’ measurement instruments to evaluate adverse events after spinal manipulation therapy. Eur J Integr Med 2014;6.
    1. Pohlman KA, Carroll L, Tsuyuki RT, et al. . Active versus passive adverse event reporting after pediatric chiropractic manual therapy: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial. Trials 2017;18:575. 10.1186/s13063-017-2301-0
    1. Cherkin DC, Sherman KJ, Kahn J, et al. . Effectiveness of focused structural massage and relaxation massage for chronic low back pain: protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2009;10:96. 10.1186/1745-6215-10-96
    1. Terwee CB, Prinsen CAC, Chiarotto A, et al. . COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study. Qual Life Res 2018;27:1159–70. 10.1007/s11136-018-1829-0
    1. Pohlman K, O'Beirne M, Thiel H, et al. . Development and validation of instruments to evaluate adverse events after spinal manipulation therapy. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine 2014;20:A49 10.1089/acm.2014.5128.abstract
    1. Thiel H. Incident Reporting and Learning Systems for chiropractors - Developments in Europe. J Can Chiropr Assoc 2011;55:155–8
    1. Thiel H, Bolton J. The reporting of patient safety incidents—first experiences with the chiropractic reporting and learning system (CRLS): a pilot study. Clin Chiropr 2006;9:139–49.
    1. Vohra S, Kawchuk GN, Boon H, et al. . SafetyNET: an interdisciplinary research program to support a safety culture for spinal manipulation therapy. Eur J Integr Med 2014;6.
    1. Pham JC, Girard T, Pronovost PJ. What to do with healthcare incident reporting systems. J Public Health Res 2013;2:e27. 10.4081/jphr.2013.e27
    1. Macrae C. The problem with incident reporting. BMJ Qual Saf 2016;25:71–5. 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004732
    1. Snyder L. American College of physicians ethics and human rights Committee P. American College of physicians ethics manual: sixth edition. Ann Intern Med 2012;156:73–104.
    1. Larizgoitia I, Bouesseau M-C, Kelley E. Who efforts to promote reporting of adverse events and global learning. J Public Health Res 2013;2:e29. 10.4081/jphr.2013.e29
    1. Berger Z, Flickinger TE, Pfoh E, et al. . Promoting engagement by patients and families to reduce adverse events in acute care settings: a systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf 2014;23:bmjqs-2012-001769. 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001769
    1. Zelen M. A new design for randomized clinical trials. N Engl J Med 1979;300:1242–5. 10.1056/NEJM197905313002203
    1. Witt CM, Pach D, Brinkhaus B, et al. . Safety of acupuncture: results of a prospective observational study with 229,230 patients and introduction of a medical information and consent form. Forsch Komplementmed 2009;16:91–7. 10.1159/000209315
    1. Thiel HW, Bolton JE, Docherty S, et al. . Safety of chiropractic manipulation of the cervical spine: a prospective national survey. Spine 2007;32:2375–8. discussion 2379. 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181557bb1
    1. McClafferty H, Vohra S, Bailey M, et al. . Pediatric integrative medicine. Pediatrics 2017;140. 10.1542/peds.2017-1961
    1. Wong BM, Dyal S, Etchells EE, et al. . Application of a trigger tool in near real time to inform quality improvement activities: a prospective study in a general medicine ward. BMJ Qual &amp;amp; Saf 2015;24:272 LP–81.
    1. Adamson J, Cockayne S, Puffer S, et al. . Review of randomised trials using the post-randomised consent (Zelen’s) design. Contemp Clin Trials 2006;27:305–19.
    1. Kamper SJ, Dissing KB, Hestbaek L. Whose pain is it anyway? comparability of pain reports from children and their parents. Chiropr Man Therap 2016;24:24.
    1. Upton P, Lawford J, Eiser C. Parent-Child agreement across child health-related quality of life instruments: a review of the literature. Qual Life Res An Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehabil 2008;17:895–913.

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다