In safe hands: Patients' experiences of intrahospital transport during intensive care

Reconceptualizing Patient Safety Beyond Harm: Insights From a Mixed-Methods Qualitative Inquiry

BACKGROUND

Although patients' and care partners' perspectives on patient safety can guide health care learning and improvements, this information remains underutilized. Efforts to leverage this valuable data require challenging the narrow focus of safety as the absence of harm.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to gain a broader insight into how patients and care partners perceive and experience safety.

METHODS

We used a mixed-methods approach that included a literature review and interviews and focus groups with patients, care partners, and health care providers. An emergent coding schema was developed from triangulation of the 2 data sets.

RESULTS

Two core themes-feeling unsafe and feeling safe-emerged that collectively represent a broader view of safety.

CONCLUSION

Knowledge from patients and care partners about feeling unsafe and safe needs to inform efforts to mitigate harm and promote safety, well-being, and positive outcomes and experiences.

Proactive risk assessment of intrahospital transport of critically ill patients from emergency department to intensive care unit in a teaching hospital and its implications

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To explore the effects of the health failure mode and effect analysis (HFMEA) used in intrahospital transport (IHT) of critically ill patients from emergency department (ED) to the intensive care unit (ICU).

BACKGROUND

Patients who were transported from ED to ICU is highly critical. IHT of these patients is potentially risky, which may associate with adverse events (AEs). The concern of safe IHT can be addressed by performing proactive risk assessments using HFMEA and implementing the findings after the ED of our hospital being reconstructed.

DESIGN

A qualitative action research study combined with a quantitative cross-sectional method.

METHODS

According to the HFMEA method, the failure modes of IHT were identified and analysed, and the effect of alterations was verified. We built a project team, drawn up a IHT flow chart, defined steps of IHT, classified the failure modes, calculated risk priority number and analysed by the decision tree, then formulated an action plan and verified the effects of the alterations. Incidence of AEs of transport was compared before and after HFMEA.SQUIRE 2.0 checklist was chosen on reporting the study process.

RESULTS

The HFMEA outlined a total of 5 major steps and 16 sub-steps in the IHT process. From this, 64 potential failure modes were identified, with 17 modes having a RPN score higher than 8. Determined by the decision tree, there were 20 priority control failure modes, of which 16 involved 8 IHT alterations. Notable work-flow alterations included use of a three-stage hierarchical transport strategy based on patients' condition assisted by the intelligent assessment system. Incidence of AEs was significantly decreased from 19.64% to 7.14% after the implementation of HFMEA (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Application of the HFMEA in optimising IHT process can improve the safety of transportation, which is worthy of promotion. Hierarchical transport scheme can reduce the incidence of AEs in IHT of critical emergency patients, which mainly includes the integration and construction of the transport team, equipment configuration and patient information system based on the classification of patients' condition.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Nurses play a crucial role in the IHT process. HFMEA can be adopted for proactive risk assessment of critically ill patients' IHT from ED to ICU which involves multiple processes. The IHT hierarchical strategy based on the results of failure mode analysis should be more widely used to further verify its clinical effects.