Bill Overview
Title: National Patient Safety Board Act of 2022
Description: This bill establishes the National Patient Safety Board for preventing and reducing patient safety events (i.e., an action or inaction that led to, or could have led to, patient injury or harm in a health care setting). In particular, the board must (1) support the adoption and use of technologies for monitoring and anticipating patient safety events, (2) study the causes of and solutions to patient safety events, and (3) develop recommendations to prevent patient safety events.
Sponsors: Rep. Barragan, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44]
Target Audience
Population: People using healthcare services
Estimated Size: 330000000
- The bill focuses on improving patient safety in healthcare settings, which implies it affects anyone who uses healthcare services.
- Globally, around 7 billion people have access to some form of healthcare services.
- Assuming about 17% of the world population is not in a position where they can access healthcare easily, the remaining 83% could potentially benefit from patient safety improvements.
- In the US, given its healthcare infrastructure, nearly the entire population has access to healthcare services, hence the impact is wide-reaching.
Reasoning
- This policy primarily impacts individuals who interact with the healthcare system. This could include healthcare workers, patients receiving regular care, and chronic illness sufferers who have frequent healthcare encounters.
- The direct impact is likely to be strongest among those who have experienced adverse patient safety events in the past, as the policy aims to reduce such incidents.
- Given the universal nature of healthcare access in the United States, the range of people is broad, covering various ages, occupations, and health statuses.
- To maintain variety in perspectives, the interviews include recipients of different types of healthcare services, such as hospital care, routine check-ups, specialty, and emergency services.
Simulated Interviews
Nurse (New York, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a healthcare provider, any effort to improve safety is crucial.
- I believe the policy could potentially reduce stress and improve work conditions if fewer adverse events occur.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retired (Tucson, AZ)
Age: 72 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy will prevent others from experiencing preventable hospital mishaps like I did.
- It feels reassuring to know healthcare safety might improve.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Software Engineer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't expect to see much if any direct impact from this policy for myself.
- It's good that the policy focuses on safety, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Primary care physician (Portland, OR)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic about the policy's potential to improve clinical guidelines and reduce emergencies.
- It aligns well with the preventive care approach we emphasize.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Patient Safety Consultant (Miami, FL)
Age: 67 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Implementing such policies is vital for standardizing care across systems.
- I believe it may harmonize patient safety practices throughout the nation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Medical Researcher (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Enhancing patient safety complements ongoing research initiatives aiming to improve treatment efficacy.
- Having a dedicated board is a progressive step towards integrated healthcare solutions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
College Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 21 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I guess it's good to know hospitals might be safer.
- Probably won't affect me much, but I'm glad for those who need it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Firefighter (Seattle, WA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen too many preventable accidents due to safety issues.
- Glad to see efforts to tackle this are being prioritized.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Chronic patient (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 59 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am anxious about errors during my healthcare encounters.
- Hopefully, this policy makes a real difference in my treatment experience.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
General Surgeon (Houston, TX)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Surgical safety can always be improved, and this policy is a step forward.
- Patient safety events need systematic addressing which this board might provide.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $110000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $150000000)
Year 2: $110000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $150000000)
Year 3: $120000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $160000000)
Year 5: $130000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $170000000)
Year 10: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $200000000)
Year 100: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)
Key Considerations
- The complexity of accurately measuring patient safety improvements and their direct cost savings.
- Potential bureaucratic delays in board establishment and impact realization.
- Need for collaboration with existing healthcare infrastructure and technology providers.