Abstract As the US population ages, primary care is expected to be the health care “home” for older adults, and several initiatives are aimed at helping to transform primary care practice to care for this population. Wide variation in staffing has been observed. Meyers et al proposed ideal models of primary care staffing for a general population and for a frail elderly population (2018). We developed the 2018 Survey of Primary Care and Geriatric Clinicians to measure optimal team configuration in clinical practices caring for older adults. A majority employed NPs, MDs and PAs, with [r = -.53] between % of clinician labor of NPs and physicians). High-NP practices are more likely located in states with full scope of practice, perform well for frail elders and are less expensive. Meyers' models, with fewer physicians, more SW and CHWs, more RNs, perform better for frail elders, and are less expensive.

Background

Although some patients experience adverse events (AEs) resulting in harm caused by treatments in dentistry, few published reports have detailed how dental providers describe these events. Understanding how dental treatment professionals view AEs is essential to building a safer environment in dental practice.

Methods

The authors interviewed dental professionals and domain experts through focus groups and in-depth interviews and asked them to identify the types of AEs that may occur in dental settings.

Results

The initial interview and focus group findings yielded 1,514 items that included both causes and AEs. In total, 632 causes were coded into 1 of the 8 categories of the Eindhoven classification, and 882 AEs were coded into 12 categories of a newly developed dental AE classification. Interrater reliability was moderate among coders. The list was reanalyzed, and duplicate items were removed leaving a total of 747 unique AEs and 540 causes. The most frequently identified AE types were "aspiration and ingestion" at 14% (n = 142), "wrong-site, wrong-procedure, wrong-patient errors" at 13%, "hard-tissue damage" at 13%, and "soft-tissue damage" at 12%.

Conclusions

Dental providers identified a large and diverse list of AEs. These events ranged from "death due to cardiac arrest" to "jaw fatigue from lengthy procedures."

Practical implications

Identifying threats to patient safety is a key element of improving dental patient safety. An inventory of dental AEs underpins efforts to track, prevent, and mitigate these events.

Background

Dentists strive to provide safe and effective oral healthcare. However, some patients may encounter an adverse event (AE) defined as "unnecessary harm due to dental treatment." In this research, we propose and evaluate two systems for categorizing the type and severity of AEs encountered at the dental office.

Methods

Several existing medical AE type and severity classification systems were reviewed and adapted for dentistry. Using data collected in previous work, two initial dental AE type and severity classification systems were developed. Eight independent reviewers performed focused chart reviews, and AEs identified were used to evaluate and modify these newly developed classifications.

Results

A total of 958 charts were independently reviewed. Among the reviewed charts, 118 prospective AEs were found and 101 (85.6%) were verified as AEs through a consensus process. At the end of the study, a final AE type classification comprising 12 categories, and an AE severity classification comprising 7 categories emerged. Pain and infection were the most common AE types representing 73% of the cases reviewed (56% and 17%, respectively) and 88% were found to cause temporary, moderate to severe harm to the patient.

Conclusions

Adverse events found during the chart review process were successfully classified using the novel dental AE type and severity classifications. Understanding the type of AEs and their severity are important steps if we are to learn from and prevent patient harm in the dental office.