Issue link: https://beckershealthcare.uberflip.com/i/626854
7 PATIENT SAFETY said in a December webinar on sep- sis protocols. Hospitals that meet compliance with the sepsis early management bundle can help lower sepsis mor- tality as well as costs associated with treating sepsis (which, according to Mike Abrams, president and CEO of the Ohio Hospital Association, can reach anywhere from $22,000 to $57,000 per case). "Super" superbugs. Superbugs — defined by Brian K. Coombes, PhD, of McMaster University in Ontario as bacteria that cannot be treated using two or more antibi- otics — continue to pose a threat to patients, and they appear to be getting stronger: A CDC report published in December revealed a particularly dangerous set of CRE strains is cause for public health concern in the U.S. "Newly de- scribed resistance in Enterobacte- riaceae…highlight[s] the contin- ued urgency to delay the spread of CRE," the report reads. e strains have been named the "phantom menace" by some scien- tists, and they aren't the only super- bugs infectious disease specialists and healthcare providers will be keeping an eye on in 2016 — re- searchers in China published data on a bacteria found in pigs, broil- er chickens and humans that con- tains a gene that makes it resistant to all forms of antibiotics, includ- ing "last resort" drugs used to beat the toughest antimicrobial resistant bugs. e gene responsible for re- sistance is called mcr-1, and has also been identified in Denmark. e gene has been found in E. coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae bacteria, according to the Chinese study. Small steps — like boosting the focus on antibiotic stewardship — can be taken this year to help combat the spread of these surre- al-sounding organisms. The cyber-insecurity of medical devices. In July 2015, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued an official warning to hospitals asking they reconsider using the Hospira Symbiq Infusion System, a computerized pump that is widely used to deliver general infusion therapy. e warning came aer it became apparent that with some ease, hackers could remotely access the device and alter dosages. But experts have been sounding the alarm on the cybersecurity of medical devices for some time now. In 2011, Jay Radcliffe, senior secu- rity consultant and researcher for security data and analytics com- pany Rapid7, wowed audiences at the Def Con hacking conference in Las Vegas when he hacked his own Medtronic insulin pump. Cybersecurity concerns have grad- uated from a health IT-specific worry to one that carries patient safety risks serious enough to be on everyone's radar. Many medical devices connect to and operate on hospital networks that are already rife with vulnerabilities, and even if the goal isn't to hurt patients who may be connected to the devices, hackers can hopscotch onto the network from the device's entry point, gathering protected health information and exploiting vulner- able data. In the next year, there will likely be some organized pushes to secure those devices — or at least a push to put manufacturer, federal and healthcare providers' feet to the fire to start drumming up solutions. Going transparent with quality data. Most health systems query patients about their experiences and satisfaction with physicians during their hospital stays. But few opt to put those ratings online for all to see, although there's reason to believe the practice can improve patient safety. "When everyone — physicians, pa- tients, institutions, and the press — is privy to data on performance, physicians will develop a greater sense of accountability to deliver quality care," Ashish K. Jha, MD, a patient safety researcher at Har- vard University's School of Public Health in Cambridge, Mass., wrote in a Harvard Business Review post in October. Aggregated ratings can be helpful learning tools for reviewing indi- vidual employee performance, and they also incentivize medical staff to double check their work and pay more attention to areas where slip-ups can impact their ratings, and ultimately the safety of those in their care. At some institutions, ratings are displayed internally, enabling side-by-side compari- sons that might produce insights into best practices or encourage a healthy sense of competition. In the future, this kind of openness could become a necessity for hos- pitals and health systems who want to compete in a market with an in- creasing focus on transparency. In addition to fostering quality im- provement, facilitating this kind of feedback and discussion has the capacity to highlight low points in patient care of which administra- tion may not have previously been