Investigating the feasibility of a patient feedback tool to improve safety in Australian primary care: a study protocol

Effectiveness of New Tools to Define an Up-to-Date Patient Safety Risk Map: A Primary Care Study Protocol

Background: Reducing incidents related to health care interventions to improve patient safety is a health policy priority. To strengthen a culture of safety, reporting incidents is essential. This study aims to define a patient safety risk map using the description and analysis of incidents within a primary care region with a prior patient safety improvement strategy organisationally developed and promoted. Methods: The study will be conducted in two phases: (1) a cross-sectional descriptive observational study to describe reported incidents; and (2) a quasi-experimental study to compare reported incidents. The study will take place in the Camp de Tarragona Primary Care Management (Catalan Institute of Health). In Phase 1, all reactive notifications collected within one year (2018) will be analysed; during Phase 2, all proactive notifications of the second and third weeks of June 2019 will be analysed. Adverse events will also be assessed. Phases 1 and 2 will use a digital platform and the proactive tool proSP to notify and analyse incidents related to patient safety. Expected Results: To obtain an up-to-date, primary care patient safety risk map to prioritise strategies that result in safer practices.

Nature and type of patient-reported safety incidents in primary care: cross-sectional survey of patients from Australia and England

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement in safety has shown positive effects in preventing or reducing adverse events and potential safety risks. Capturing and utilising patient-reported safety incident data can be used for service learning and improvement.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to characterise the nature of patient-reported safety incidents in primary care.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of two cross sectional studies.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients from Australian and English primary care settings.

MEASURES

Patients' self-reported experiences of safety incidents were captured using the validated Primary Care Patient Measure of Safety questionnaire. Qualitative responses to survey items were analysed and categorised using the Primary Care Patient Safety Classification System. The frequency and type of safety incidents, contributory factors, and patient and system level outcomes are presented.

RESULTS

A total of 1329 patients (n=490, England; n=839, Australia) completed the questionnaire. Overall, 5.3% (n=69) of patients reported a safety incident over the preceding 12 months. The most common incident types were administration incidents (n=27, 31%) (mainly delays in accessing a physician) and incidents involving diagnosis and assessment (n=16, 18.4%). Organisation of care accounted for 27.6% (n=29) of the contributory factors identified in the safety incidents. Staff factors (n=13, 12.4%) was the second most commonly reported contributory factor. Where an outcome could be determined, patient inconvenience (n=24, 28.6%) and clinical harm (n=21, 25%) (psychological distress and unpleasant experience) were the most frequent.

CONCLUSIONS

The nature and outcomes of patient-reported incidents differ markedly from those identified in studies of staff-reported incidents. The findings from this study emphasise the importance of capturing patient-reported safety incidents in the primary care setting. The patient perspective can complement existing sources of safety intelligence with the potential for service improvement.

Exploring primary health care professionals' perceptions about a patient feedback intervention to improve patient safety in Spanish primary health care centres: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Patient feedback interventions are receiving increasing attention given their potential to improve health care provision. However, primary health care (PHC) professionals' acceptability and perceived utility of this type of interventions remain largely unexplored.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to explore PHC professionals' perceptions, opinions and suggestions about a patient feedback intervention currently being designed to improve patient safety in Spanish PHC centres.

METHODS

We conducted an exploratory qualitative study with 43 PHC professionals. Information was obtained from three semi-structured interviews and four focus groups. All data were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using content analysis by three analysts.

RESULTS

The patient feedback intervention was acceptable to health care professionals, who perceived it as a useful strategy to improve health care processes and activate patients. A number of factors potentially limiting the acceptability and perceived utility of the intervention were identified (low patient safety culture, low patient-centred care orientation and limited credibility of patient feedback data). Recommendations for designing and implementing the proposed intervention in the Spanish PHC centres were identified in relation to the following areas: 'collection and analysis of feedback data'; 'feedback display'; 'feedback delivery' and; 'implementation of safety improvement initiatives'.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the proposed intervention was generally perceived as useful and acceptable, our study identified a number of tensions about the practical aspects of using the patient-reported data and the credibility of the data and what actions would arise from its use. The intervention has been adapted to address these tensions before its formal evaluation in a randomized clinical trial.

Using patient feedback to drive quality improvement in hospitals: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Although different forms of patient feedback are available, their use in hospital management is still limited. The objective of this study is to explore how patient feedback is currently used in hospitals to improve quality.

DESIGN

This is a qualitative exploratory multiple case study. Data collection included nine interviews, of an average duration of 50 min, conducted between March and June 2019. Additionally, a document and secondary data analysis were performed.

SETTING

This study was conducted in three Brazilian hospitals selected for their solid patient feedback practises.

PARTICIPANTS

Managers from the customer service, quality, nursing, operations, projects and patient experience departments of the three hospitals.

RESULTS

Despite literature suggesting that organisational objectives regarding patient feedback are not clear, data show that there is managerial concern regarding the promotion of an environment capable of changing according to patient feedback. In these instances, organisational processes were structured to focus on patients' feedback and its receipt by the staff, including a non-punitive culture. Several patient feedback forms are available: voluntary events, patient surveys and informal feedback. Instruments to measure patient feedback focused on specific aspects of healthcare, to identify and clarify the problems for addressal by the management. The net promoter score was the main strategic indicator of patient feedback, used to assess the impact of improvement action.

CONCLUSIONS

The hospitals had established objectives that valued the patient's perspective. Involvement of the health team, availability of different channels for feedback and the use of quality tools are considered a good basis for using patient feedback to drive quality improvement.

Patient feedback for safety improvement in primary care: results from a feasibility study

OBJECTIVES

Patient involvement in safety improvement is a developing area of research. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of a patient feedback on safety intervention in primary care. Specifically, the intervention acceptability, fidelity, implementation enablers and barriers, scalability, and process of systematically collecting safety data were examined.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Mixed-methods feasibility trial with six purposively selected Australian primary care practices.

INTERVENTION

The intervention comprised an iterative process with a cycle of measurement, learning, feedback, action planning and implementation period of 6 months.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Qualitative and quantitative data relating to feasibility measures (acceptability, fidelity, enablers, barriers, scalability and process of collecting safety data) were collected and analysed.

RESULTS

A total of n=1750 patients provided feedback on safety. There was a statistically significant increase in mean patient safety scores indicating improved safety (4.30-4.37, p=0.002). Staff deemed the intervention acceptable, with minor recommendations for improvement. Intervention fidelity was high and implementation enablers were attributed to the intervention structure and framework, use of intuitive problem-solving approaches, and multidisciplinary team involvement. Practice-based safety interventions resulted in sustainable and measurable changes to systems for safety, such as increased access to care and improved patient information accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate that this innovative patient feedback on safety intervention is feasible for scale-up to a larger effectiveness trial and further spread into policy and practice. This intervention complements existing safety improvement strategies and activities, and integrates into current patient feedback service requirements for Australian primary care. Further research is needed to examine the intervention effects on safety incident reduction.

A qualitative exploration of mental health service user and carer perspectives on safety issues in UK mental health services

BACKGROUND

Service user and carer perspectives on safety issues in mental health services are not well known and may be important in preventing and reducing harm. The development of the Yorkshire Contributory Factors Framework-Mental Health (YCFF-MH) provides a broad structure within which to explore these perspectives.

OBJECTIVE

To explore what service users of mental health services and their carers consider to be safety issues.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Qualitative interviews with 13 service users and 7 carers in the UK. Participants were asked about their experiences and perceptions of safety within mental health services. Perceived safety issues were identified using framework analysis, guided by the YCFF-MH.

RESULTS

Service users and carers identified a broad range of safety issues. These were categorized under 'safety culture' and included psychological concepts of safety and raising concerns; 'social environment' involved threatened violence and sexual abuse; 'individual service user and staff factors' dominated by not being listened to; 'management of staff and staffing levels' resulting in poor continuity of care; and 'service process' typified by difficulty accessing services during a crisis. Several examples of 'active failures' were also described.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Safety issues appear broader than those recorded and reported by health services and inspectorates. Many safety issues have also been identified in other care settings supporting the notion that there are overlaps between service users and carers' perspectives of safety in mental health services and those of users in other settings. Areas for further research are suggested.