scholarly journals Improving patient safety through the involvement of patients: development and evaluation of novel interventions to engage patients in preventing patient safety incidents and protecting them against unintended harm

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (15) ◽  
pp. 1-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Wright ◽  
Rebecca Lawton ◽  
Jane O’Hara ◽  
Gerry Armitage ◽  
Laura Sheard ◽  
...  

BackgroundEstimates suggest that, in NHS hospitals, incidents causing harm to patients occur in 10% of admissions, with costs to the NHS of > £2B. About one-third of harmful events are believed to be preventable. Strategies to reduce patient safety incidents (PSIs) have mostly focused on changing systems of care and professional behaviour, with the role that patients can play in enhancing the safety of care being relatively unexplored. However, although the role and effectiveness of patient involvement in safety initiatives is unclear, previous work has identified a general willingness among patients to contribute to initiatives to improve health-care safety.AimOur aim in this programme was to design, develop and evaluate four innovative approaches to engage patients in preventing PSIs: assessing risk, reporting incidents, direct engagement in preventing harm and education and training.Methods and resultsWe developed tools to report PSIs [patient incident reporting tool (PIRT)] and provide feedback on factors that might contribute to PSIs in the future [Patient Measure of Safety (PMOS)]. These were combined into a single instrument and evaluated in the Patient Reporting and Action for a Safe Environment (PRASE) intervention using a randomised design. Although take-up of the intervention by, and retention of, participating hospital wards was 100% and patient participation was high at 86%, compliance with the intervention, particularly the implementation of action plans, was poor. We found no significant effect of the intervention on outcomes at 6 or 12 months. The ThinkSAFE project involved the development and evaluation of an intervention to support patients to directly engage with health-care staff to enhance their safety through strategies such as checking their care and speaking up to staff if they had any concerns. The piloting of ThinkSAFE showed that the approach is feasible and acceptable to users and may have the potential to improve patient safety. We also developed a patient safety training programme for junior doctors based on patients who had experienced PSIs recounting their own stories. This approach was compared with traditional methods of patient safety teaching in a randomised controlled trial. The study showed that delivering patient safety training based on patient narratives is feasible and had an effect on emotional engagement and learning about communication. However, there was no effect on changing general attitudes to safety compared with the control.ConclusionThis research programme has developed a number of novel interventions to engage patients in preventing PSIs and protecting them against unintended harm. In our evaluations of these interventions we have been unable to demonstrate any improvement in patient safety although this conclusion comes with a number of caveats, mainly about the difficulty of measuring patient safety outcomes. Reflecting this difficulty, one of our recommendations for future research is to develop reliable and valid measures to help efficiently evaluate safety improvement interventions. The programme found patients to be willing to codesign, coproduce and participate in initiatives to prevent PSIs and the approaches used were feasible and acceptable. These factors together with recent calls to strengthen the patient voice in health care could suggest that the tools and interventions from this programme would benefit from further development and evaluation.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN07689702.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

2021 ◽  
pp. 33-35
Author(s):  
Sushil Kumar ◽  
PK Dash ◽  
Gurdarshdeep Singh Madan

Maintaining health care quality and patient safety standards are essential for providing high quality patient care while ensuring safety to both patient and health care staff. DHMOSH requires all UN medical establishments to comply with HQPS standards which are derived from JCI specication. Our hospital is highest eld medical echelon in the UN. Patient safety and health care quality is not a destination but a continuous journey and this article intends to share the journey of the hospital through challenges faced, undergoing course correction and nally successfully undergoing HQPS assessment during ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.


Author(s):  
Vasiliki Kapaki ◽  
Kyriakos Souliotis

Patient Safety is considered to be the most important parameter of quality that every contemporary healthcare system should be aiming at. The terms “Patient Safety” and “Medical Errors” are directly linked to the “Safety Culture and Climate” in every organization. It is widely accepted that medical errors constitute an index of insufficient safety and are defined as any unintentional event that diminishes or could diminish the level of patient safety. This chapter indicates that a beneficial safety culture is essential to enhance and assure patient safety. Furthermore, health care staff with a positive safety culture is more probable to learn openly and successfully from errors and injuries.


2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Gillian Janes ◽  
Thomas Mills ◽  
Luke Budworth ◽  
Judith Johnson ◽  
Rebecca Lawton

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lloy Wylie ◽  
Stephanie McConkey ◽  
Ann Marie Corrado

Indigenous Peoples in Canada continue to experience racism and discrimination when accessing health care. Competencies of health care staff urgently need to be improved through cultural safety education and training programs to inform culturally appropriate and safe care practice among care providers serving Indigenous individuals and families. This paper explores current educational strategies, the perspectives of Indigenous and non-Indigenous care providers on training approaches, and recommendations for improving training. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 participants to explore the current provision of culturally appropriate and safe care. Interviews were voice recorded and transcribed verbatim, and a thematic analysis was completed. The three key themes related to training that emerged from data analysis were (a) addressing the knowledge gaps, (b) challenges of current training approaches, and (c) recommendations for improvements in training. Each key theme had three subthemes that were further explored. Cultural safety training is a long and iterative process that has the potential to change care providers’ behaviours and attitudes. Various challenges to existing education and training included issues with implementation, limited follow up with health care staff to support practice changes, and/or limited commitment from senior leadership to change organizational policies and practices. As such, there is a clear need for systemic change within health care institutions to support staff participating in cultural safety training and to put that training into practice to create a culturally safe space for Indigenous individuals seeking health care.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (36) ◽  
pp. 1-104
Author(s):  
Laura Sheard ◽  
Claire Marsh ◽  
Thomas Mills ◽  
Rosemary Peacock ◽  
Joseph Langley ◽  
...  

Background Patients are increasingly being asked to provide feedback about their experience of health-care services. Within the NHS, a significant level of resource is now allocated to the collection of this feedback. However, it is not well understood whether or not, or how, health-care staff are able to use these data to make improvements to future care delivery. Objective To understand and enhance how hospital staff learn from and act on patient experience (PE) feedback in order to co-design, test, refine and evaluate a Patient Experience Toolkit (PET). Design A predominantly qualitative study with four interlinking work packages. Setting Three NHS trusts in the north of England, focusing on six ward-based clinical teams (two at each trust). Methods A scoping review and qualitative exploratory study were conducted between November 2015 and August 2016. The findings of this work fed into a participatory co-design process with ward staff and patient representatives, which led to the production of the PET. This was primarily based on activities undertaken in three workshops (over the winter of 2016/17). Then, the facilitated use of the PET took place across the six wards over a 12-month period (February 2017 to February 2018). This involved testing and refinement through an action research (AR) methodology. A large, mixed-methods, independent process evaluation was conducted over the same 12-month period. Findings The testing and refinement of the PET during the AR phase, with the mixed-methods evaluation running alongside it, produced noteworthy findings. The idea that current PE data can be effectively triangulated for the purpose of improvement is largely a fallacy. Rather, additional but more relational feedback had to be collected by patient representatives, an unanticipated element of the study, to provide health-care staff with data that they could work with more easily. Multidisciplinary involvement in PE initiatives is difficult to establish unless teams already work in this way. Regardless, there is merit in involving different levels of the nursing hierarchy. Consideration of patient feedback by health-care staff can be an emotive process that may be difficult initially and that needs dedicated time and sensitive management. The six ward teams engaged variably with the AR process over a 12-month period. Some teams implemented far-reaching plans, whereas other teams focused on time-minimising ‘quick wins’. The evaluation found that facilitation of the toolkit was central to its implementation. The most important factors here were the development of relationships between people and the facilitator’s ability to navigate organisational complexity. Limitations The settings in which the PET was tested were extremely diverse, so the influence of variable context limits hard conclusions about its success. Conclusions The current manner in which PE feedback is collected and used is generally not fit for the purpose of enabling health-care staff to make meaningful local improvements. The PET was co-designed with health-care staff and patient representatives but it requires skilled facilitation to achieve successful outcomes. Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.


Author(s):  
E. Rydwik ◽  
L. Anmyr ◽  
M. Regardt ◽  
A. McAllister ◽  
R. Zarenoe ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The knowledge of the long-term consequences of covid-19 is limited. In patients, symptoms such as fatigue, decreased physical, psychological, and cognitive function, and nutritional problems have been reported. How the disease has affected next of kin, as well as staff involved in the care of patients with covid-19, is also largely unknown. The overall aim of this study is therefore three-fold: (1) to describe and evaluate predictors of patient recovery, the type of rehabilitation received and patients’ experiences of specialized rehabilitation following COVID-19 infection; (2) to study how next of kin experienced the hospital care of their relative and their experiences of the psychosocial support they received as well as their psychological wellbeing; (3) to describe experiences of caring for patients with COVID-19 and evaluate psychological wellbeing, coping mechanisms and predictors for development of psychological distress over time in health care staff. Methods This observational longitudinal study consists of three cohorts; patients, next of kin, and health care staff. The assessments for the patients consist of physical tests (lung function, muscle strength, physical capacity) and questionnaires (communication and swallowing, nutritional status, hearing, activities of daily living, physical activity, fatigue, cognition) longitudinally at 3, 6 and 12 months. Patient records auditing (care, rehabilitation) will be done retrospectively at 12 months. Patients (3, 6 and 12 months), next of kin (6 months) and health care staff (baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months) will receive questionnaires regarding, health-related quality of life, depression, anxiety, sleeping disorders, and post-traumatic stress. Staff will also answer questionnaires about burnout and coping strategies. Interviews will be conducted in all three cohorts. Discussion This study will be able to answer different research questions from a quantitative and qualitative perspective, by describing and evaluating long-term consequences and their associations with recovery, as well as exploring patients’, next of kins’ and staffs’ views and experiences of the disease and its consequences. This will form a base for a deeper and better understanding of the consequences of the disease from different perspectives as well as helping the society to better prepare for a future pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document