Design of a safety round model for intensive care units

INTRODUCTION

Safety Rounds (SR) are an operational tool that allow knowing adherence to good practices, help identify risks and incidents in patient safety (PS), allowing improvement actions to be implemented. The objective of this work was the design of a procedure to perform SR in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU).

METHODS

Preparation of a checklist for the development of SR in the ICU through the nominal group technique, with the participation of managers, middle managers and professionals from different disciplines and categories. In the first place, a group of experts agreed, based on the recommendations on good practices in PS, the definition of items, their coding, the criteria for compliance and the impact of non-compliance. Subsequently, its viability was determined through a cross-sectional study through the piloting of two SRs to adjust the items in real clinical practice conditions.

RESULTS

A specific SR model for ICUs has been obtained through a checklist. The group of experts prepared a first list made up of 39 items of 6 essential dimensions and defined the method of implementation. Mean time to complete the two SRs was 85 min, including the briefing and subsequent debriefing. After the validation pilot, the dimensions were reduced to 5, 3 items were deleted, 2 items were transferred to another dimension and 3 items related to nosocomial infections and informed consent were modified. In addition, the data sources, the compliance criteria and their relative weight were redefined. The final list was considered useful and relevant to improve practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Through a consensus methodology, a checklist has been built to be used in the RS of an ICU. This model can serve as a basis for its use in healthcare services with similar characteristics.

A scoping review of the impact of organisational factors on providers and related interventions in LMICs: Implications for respectful maternity care

We have limited understanding of the organisational issues at the health facility-level that impact providers and care as it relates to mistreatment in childbirth, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). By extension, it is not clear what types of facility-level organisational changes or changes in working environments in LMICs could support and enable respectful maternity care (RMC). While there has been relatively more attention to health system pressures related to shortages of staff and other resources as key barriers, other organisational challenges may be less explored in the context of RMC. This scoping review aims to consolidate evidence to address these gaps. We searched literature published in English between 2000-2021 within Scopus, PubMed, Google Scholar and ScienceDirect databases. Study selection was two-fold. Maternal health articles articulating an organisational issue at the facility- level and impact on providers and/or care in an LMIC setting were included. We also searched for literature on interventions but due to the limited number of related intervention studies in maternity care specifically, we expanded intervention study criteria to include all medical disciplines. Organisational issues captured from the non-intervention, maternal health studies, and solutions offered by intervention studies across disciplines were organised thematically and to establish linkages between problems and solutions. Of 5677 hits, 54 articles were included: 41 non-intervention maternal healthcare studies and 13 intervention studies across all medical disciplines. Key organisational challenges relate to high workload, unbalanced division of work, lack of professional autonomy, low pay, inadequate training, poor feedback and supervision, and workplace violence, and these were differentially influenced by resource shortages. Interventions that respond to these challenges focus on leadership, supportive supervision, peer support, mitigating workplace violence, and planning for shortages. While many of these issues were worsened by resource shortages, medical and professional hierarchies also strongly underpinned a number of organisational problems. Frontline providers, particularly midwives and nurses, suffer disproportionately and need greater attention. Transforming institutional leadership and approaches to supervision may be particularly useful to tackle existing power hierarchies that could in turn support a culture of respectful care.

Nurses' Decisions in Error Reporting and Disclosing Based on Error Scenarios: A Mixed-method Study

Background: It is ensured that nurses’ error reporting and disclosing improve services to patients and are considered a movement toward creating a culture of transparency in the healthcare system. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the nurses' decisions on reporting and disclosing Medical Errors (MEs). Methods: This research followed a mixed-method embedded design that was performed in five hospitals in Iran in 2018. A total of 491 nurses participated in the quantitative phase of the study with stratified sampling, followed by a simple random sampling technique. Also, 22 nurses joined the qualitative phase. Data were collected using a researcher-made questionnaire and semi-structured interviews through a scenario-based method. Quantitative data analysis was performed using descriptive and analytical statistics by SPSS 21.0 and Expert Choice 10.0 software. The qualitative data were analyzed based on the content analysis approach. Results: The most important perceived barriers with the highest impact coincided with educational (57.17%) and motivational (56.77%) factors based on SEM analysis (ES: 1.33, SE: 0.16). Regression analysis showed that error-reporting mechanisms, educational factors, and reporting consequences were significantly associated with age, sex, and work experience (P-Value ≤0.05). Error scenarios were thematized into three categories: Error perception (including ambiguity and weakness in error definition, the severity of the error, unawareness of guidelines, deviation from standards, and untrained staff), error reporting (including ineffective reporting system, hesitation in reporting to a formal system, increased workload, improper reaction, punitive responses, and concerns about consequences), and error disclosure (including no disclosure, partial disclosure, and full disclosure). Conclusions: The obtained results contributed to a better understanding of the barriers to error reporting and disclosing. In addition, these results can help hospitals encourage error reporting and ultimately make organizational changes, which reduce the incidence of errors.

Identifying contextually relevant improvement measures, illustrated by a case of executive walkrounds

PURPOSE

A method to engage salient organisational stakeholders in identifying and ranking measures of healthcare improvement programs is described. The method is illustrated using Executive WalkRounds (EWRs) in a multi-site Australian Health District.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

Subject matter experts (SMEs) conducted document analysis, identified potential EWRs measures, created driver diagrams and then eliminated weak measures. Next, a panel of executives skilled in EWRs ranked and ratified the potential measures using a modified Delphi technique.

FINDINGS

EWRs measurement selection demonstrated the feasibility of the method. Of the total time to complete the method 79% was contributed by SMEs, 14% by administration personnel and 7% by executives. Document analysis revealed three main EWRs aims. Ten of 28 potential measures were eliminated by the SME review. After repeated Delphi rounds the executive panel achieved consensus (75% cut-off) on seven measures. One outcome, one process and one implementation fidelity metric were selected to measure and monitor the impact of EWRs in the health district.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Perceptions of weak relationships between measures and intended improvements can lead to practitioner scepticism. This work offers a structured method to combine the technical expertise of SMEs with the practical knowledge of healthcare staff in selecting improvement measures.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This research describes and demonstrates a novel method to systematically leverage formal and practical types of expertise to select measures that are strongly linked to local quality improvement goals. The method can be applied in diverse healthcare settings.

Patient safety in chiropractic teaching programs: a mixed methods study

Background

Patient safety research has lagged within academic settings, including chiropractic teaching institutions. To develop a robust patient safety culture, the Institute of Medicine emphasized the need for employee’s attitudes to be understanding and positive. To initiate the assessment of the current culture and future needs, this study evaluated patient safety attitudes among chiropractic teaching clinic stakeholders (supervising clinicians, student interns, and administrative staff) and compared their standardized survey scores to established medical survey databases.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional, mixed methods survey design with quantitative analytic priority. Chiropractic interns, clinical faculty, and clinic staff of 5 international chiropractic educational programs completed a modified version of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Patient Safety Culture for Medical Offices Survey with open-ended comment fields between 2014 and 2016. Composite means of positive responses were calculated and compared to patient safety, quality of care, and overall self-ratings benchmarks from Canadian providers and academic settings in the AHRQ database. Qualitative responses were thematically categorized for a convergent analysis of quantitative results for the chiropractic sample.

Results

Chiropractic survey response rate was 45.3% (n = 645). Quantitative survey results indicated moderate scores and ranges (57–85%) on all patient safety dimensions for the chiropractic samples. Academic medicine and chiropractic providers’ benchmarks scored higher positive responses than chiropractic teaching clinics on most quantitative dimensions, except for work pressure/pace. Teamwork, organizational learning, and patient tracking/follow-up were the most positively endorsed quantitative dimensions, with communication, staff training, office standardization, and leadership support considered areas for improvement in both settings. Qualitative responses for the chiropractic clinics identified a need for open communication; additional staff training and student involvement in creating safety cultures; standardization of office processes including information exchange, scheduling, and equipment maintenance; and leadership support that focused on decreasing work pressure/pace and setting safety priorities.

Conclusion

As the first report of patient safety attitudes from stakeholders in chiropractic teaching clinics, specific areas of improvement were identified. Chiropractic teaching programs might consider incorporating these and related patient safety concepts into their formal curricula. Mixed methods approach offers teaching clinics opportunities to assess stakeholders’ insights and enhance safe delivery of chiropractic care.