Can patient involvement improve patient safety? A cluster randomised control trial of the Patient Reporting and Action for a Safe Environment (PRASE) intervention

A qualitative study of patient competence for patient engagement in their safety--from the perspective of nurses and patients

OBJECTIVES

To describe the essential competencies required for patient engagement in their own safety.

METHOD

We adopted a phenomenological approach in qualitative research to conduct semi-structured interviews with nurses (n = 14) and adult patients (n = 13) from different departments. By deeply exploring their experiences and feelings about patient engagement in patient safety, we sought to understand their views on the qualities that patients need to possess in order to participate in their own safety.

RESULTS

From the interviews, we identified six major themes, including competence of information sharing, competence of taking patient engagement as responsibility and right, competence of making equal communication, competence of maintaining trust relationship with health personnels, competence of accepting non-punitive safety culture, need of resource support, five of them showed essential competences for patients and one of them showed patients' need for promoting their engagement.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study show necessary competence and needs in patient engagement process of patient, offer a foundational reference for constructing a measurement tool for patient engagement in patient safety competence in the future, so that medical staff and patients can provide reference for the future targeted construction of patient competence improvement programs. At the same time, improving patient competence and engagement to better achieve safety goals requires the joint efforts of patients, medical staff, medical institutions, the government, and society.

Motivation for patient engagement in patient safety: a multi-perspective, explorative survey

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Despite increasing calls for more patient engagement in patient safety, limited knowledge remains on what actually motivates key stakeholders in healthcare to promote patient engagement. We therefore set out to survey key stakeholders of patient engagement in patient safety (i.e., patients, healthcare professionals, and managers). We aimed to identify and explore stakeholder's distinct and shared motives for patient engagement.

METHODS

A stepwise Delphi method was applied, utilizing semi-structured online interviews for determination of stakeholder motives for patient engagement in patient safety. In a subsequent online survey, statements were evaluated and identified. 34 subject-matter experts from all relevant stakeholder groups completed the online interviews and 33 the online survey. We used content analysis approaches for qualitative and descriptive analyses for quantitative measures. Further, we evaluated the consensus on distinct and shared motives across stakeholder groups.

RESULTS

Seven key motives for patient engagement in patient safety were identified. Major motives attributed to patients were: (1) To improve experiences and care outcomes for oneself, as well as (2) for future patients, (3) to express gratitude and appreciation, (4) to cope successfully with treatment-related emotions. A motive shared by patients and professionals was (5) to contribute actively to improved delivery of healthcare. To optimize patient safety, costs, and care processes (6) was shared by professionals and managers. Lastly, (7) to improve patient-provider relationships was jointly shared by all stakeholder groups. For four motives (1, 2, 6, 7) consensus was established.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to unlock the full potential of future interventions in patient engagement, a deeper understanding of stakeholder motives is essential. We identified a set of distinct and shared motives for patient engagement across relevant stakeholder groups. Our findings may inform future interventions in patient engagement that take account of the motivational foundations and aspirations of all stakeholders who are key for the success for collaborative patient safety and care improvements.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ID DRKS00031837 (Date May 8, 2023).

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.

The benefits and opportunities: Engaging patients in identifying and reporting patient safety incidents

There is growing recognition that patients can and should be engaged in the identification of patient safety incidents arising during their experiences across health systems. In this article, we describe the benefits that can be harnessed from engaging patients in reporting patient safety incidents; identify opportunities to support patient engagement in reporting and learning from patient safety incidents; and describe the potential role of health leaders in connecting patient experience and patient safety using patient-reported patient safety incident data.

Patient and family engagement in patient safety in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Patients can play a key role in delivering safe care by becoming actively involved in their health care. This study aimed at reviewing the literature for evidence of patients' and families' engagement in patient safety in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR).

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of the literature published in English using PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and PsycINFO until June 2023.

RESULTS

A total of 9019 studies were screened, with 22 meeting the inclusion criteria. Our review found few published studies of patient and family engagement in patient safety research in the EMR. Thirteen studies explored the attitudes, perceptions, and/or experiences / preferences of patients, families, and healthcare providers (HCPs) regarding patient engagement in patient safety. Nine publications reported patient involvement in patient safety activities at varying levels. Three categories of factors were identified that may affect patient involvement: patient-related (e.g., lack of awareness on their role in preventing harms, unwillingness to challenge HCPs' authority, and cultural barriers); HCP-related (e.g., negative attitudes towards patient engagement, poor patient-provider communication, and high workload); and healthcare setting-related (e.g., lack of relevant policies and guidelines, lack of training for patients, and HCPs, and lack of patient-centered approach).

CONCLUSION

This review highlighted limitations in the current literature on patient and family engagement in patient safety in the EMR, including both the depth of evidence and clarity of concepts. Further research is needed to explore how to actively involve patients and their families, as well as to determine whether such involvement translates into improved safety in practice.

Evaluating the content and face validity of Arabic-translated Patient Measures of Safety survey PMOS-30

BACKGROUND

The importance of patient perception of patient safety has been proven as an active role in promoting safety and predicting harm. Patients play a vital role in the healthcare sector and the impact of patient perception of patient safety has been repetitively proven in the literature to be for its effectiveness in predicting harm and promoting safety. Nonetheless, there is limited knowledge about the specific insights patients can provide concerning safety within Arab countries. Therefore, improving and strengthening active patient participation by including patients' perceptions of safety could offer novel contributions to the realm of patient safety.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the validity of the Arabic version of the PMOS-30.

METHOD

The forward-backward translation procedure was used to translate and validate the PMOS-30. Mix methods were used to assess the validity of the translated version. The expert raters evaluated the content validity and interviews were conducted with in-patients to assess the face validity. Test-retest approach was conducted to pilot the final Arabic version.

RESULTS

Data of face validity from 13 participants for the first test and 5 participants for the re-test was collected and showed an improvement in the clarity rate (71.50% and 94.66% respectively). With respect to the content validity of the final version, the CVI was 0.92, indicating excellent relevant results.

CONCLUSION

The final version of the revised was approved by the expert to be a valid tool to measure patient perceptions of patient safety in Arabic-speaking patients to be utilized on patient safety improvement initiatives.

Transitional care for older persons with need of geriatric rehabilitation nursing interventions

BACKGROUND

The literature review notes that people in need of care from Rehabilitation Programs do not always see their continuity ensured.

OBJECTIVE

This study aim to analyze the perspective of Specialists Nurse in Rehabilitation Nursing in relation to the organization and specialized intervention of transitional care for older people in need of rehabilitation programs.

METHODS

This is a qualitative study within the interpretivist paradigm. A focus group with 8 nurses and 13 interviews with Portuguese nurses were carried out between April 2022 and February 2023. Content analysis was carried out.

RESULTS

The triangulation of the data made it possible to identify 3 categories: Coordination of a transitional care program; Empowering the person to self-manage the transitional care process and Empowering the Informal Caregiver.

CONCLUSIONS

It is imperative to promote the coordination of transitional care, increase the functional capacity of the person and empower the informal caregiver.

A service-user digital intervention to collect real-time safety information on acute, adult mental health wards: the WardSonar mixed-methods study

Background

Acute inpatient mental health services report high levels of safety incidents. The application of patient safety theory has been sparse, particularly concerning interventions that proactively seek patient perspectives.

Objective(s)

Develop and evaluate a theoretically based, digital monitoring tool to collect real-time information from patients on acute adult mental health wards about their perceptions of ward safety.

Design

Theory-informed mixed-methods study. A prototype digital monitoring tool was developed from a co-design approach, implemented in hospital settings, and subjected to qualitative and quantitative evaluation.

Setting and methods

Phase 1: scoping review of the literature on patient involvement in safety interventions in acute mental health care; evidence scan of digital technology in mental health contexts; qualitative interviews with mental health patients and staff about perspectives on ward safety. This, alongside stakeholder engagement with advisory groups, service users and health professionals, informed the development processes. Most data collection was virtual. Phase 1 resulted in the technical development of a theoretically based digital monitoring tool that collected patient feedback for proactive safety monitoring. Phase 2: implementation of the tool in six adult acute mental health wards across two UK NHS trusts; evaluation via focused ethnography and qualitative interviews. Statistical analysis of WardSonar data and routine ward data involving construction of an hour-by-hour data set per ward, permitting detailed analysis of the use of the WardSonar tool.

Participants

A total of 8 patients and 13 mental health professionals participated in Phase 1 interviews; 33 staff and 34 patients participated in Phase 2 interviews.

Interventions

Patients could use a web application (the WardSonar tool) to record real-time perceptions of ward safety. Staff could access aggregated, anonymous data to inform timely interventions.

Results

Coronavirus disease 2019 restrictions greatly impacted the study. Stakeholder engagement permeated the project. Phase 1 delivered a theory-based, collaboratively designed digital tool for proactive patient safety monitoring. Phase 2 showed that the tool was user friendly and broadly acceptable to patients and staff. The aggregated safety data were infrequently used by staff. Feasibility depended on engaged staff and embedding use of the tool in ward routines. There is strong evidence that an incident leads to increased probability of further incidents within the next 4 hours. This puts a measure on the extent to which social/behavioural contagion persists. There is weak evidence to suggest that an incident leads to a greater use of the WardSonar tool in the following hour, but none to suggest that ward atmosphere predicts future incidents. Therefore, how often patients use the tool seems to send a stronger signal about potential incidents than patients' real-time reports about ward atmosphere.

Limitations

Implementation was limited to two NHS trusts. Coronavirus disease 2019 impacted design processes including stakeholder engagement; implementation; and evaluation of the monitoring tool in routine clinical practice. Higher uptake could enhance validity of the results.

Conclusions

WardSonar has the potential to provide a valuable route for patients to communicate safety concerns. The WardSonar monitoring tool has a strong patient perspective and uses proactive real-time safety monitoring rather than traditional retrospective data review.

Future work

The WardSonar tool can be refined and tested further in a post Coronavirus disease 2019 context.

Study registration

This study is registered as ISRCTN14470430.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR128070) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 14. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Promoting a Patient-Centered Understanding of Safety in Acute Mental Health Wards: A User-Centered Design Approach to Develop a Real-Time Digital Monitoring Tool

BACKGROUND

Acute mental health services report high levels of safety incidents that involve both patients and staff. The potential for patients to be involved in interventions to improve safety within a mental health setting is acknowledged, and there is a need for interventions that proactively seek the patient perspective of safety. Digital technologies may offer opportunities to address this need.

OBJECTIVE

This research sought to design and develop a digital real-time monitoring tool (WardSonar) to collect and collate daily information from patients in acute mental health wards about their perceptions of safety. We present the design and development process and underpinning logic model and programme theory.

METHODS

The first stage involved a synthesis of the findings from a systematic review and evidence scan, interviews with patients (n=8) and health professionals (n=17), and stakeholder engagement. Cycles of design activities and discussion followed with patients, staff, and stakeholder groups, to design and develop the prototype tool.

RESULTS

We drew on patient safety theory and the concepts of contagion and milieu. The data synthesis, design, and development process resulted in three prototype components of the digital monitoring tool (WardSonar): (1) a patient recording interface that asks patients to input their perceptions into a tablet computer, to assess how the ward feels and whether the direction is changing, that is, "getting worse" or "getting better"; (2) a staff dashboard and functionality to interrogate the data at different levels; and (3) a public-facing ward interface. The technology is available as open-source code.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent patient safety policy and research priorities encourage innovative approaches to measuring and monitoring safety. We developed a digital real-time monitoring tool to collect information from patients in acute mental health wards about perceived safety, to support staff to respond and intervene to changes in the clinical environment more proactively.

Evaluating an intervention to improve the safety and experience of transitions from hospital to home for older people (Your Care Needs You): a protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial and process evaluation

BACKGROUND

Older patients often experience safety issues when transitioning from hospital to home. The 'Your Care Needs You' (YCNY) intervention aims to support older people to 'know more' and 'do more' whilst in hospital so that they are better prepared for managing at home.

METHODS

A multi-centre cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) will evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the YCNY intervention. Forty acute hospital wards (clusters) in England from varying medical specialities will be randomised to deliver YCNY or care-as-usual on a 1:1 basis. The primary outcome will be unplanned hospital readmission rates within 30 days of discharge. This will be extracted from routinely collected data of at least 5440 patients (aged 75 years and older) discharged to their own homes during the 4- to 5-month YCNY intervention period. A nested cohort of up to 1000 patients will be recruited to the study to collect secondary outcomes via follow-up questionnaires at 5-, 30- and 90-day post-discharge. These will include measures of patient experience of transitions, patient-reported safety events, quality of life and healthcare resource use. Unplanned hospital readmission rates at 60 and 90 days of discharge will be collected from routine data. A process evaluation (primarily interviews and observations with patients, carers and staff) will be conducted to understand the implementation of the intervention and the contextual factors that shape this, as well as the intervention's underlying mechanisms of action. Fidelity of intervention delivery will also be assessed across all intervention wards.

DISCUSSION

This study will establish the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the YCNY intervention which aims to improve patient safety and experience for older people during transitions of care. The process evaluation will generate insights about how the YCNY intervention was implemented, what elements of the intervention work and for whom, and how to optimise its implementation so that it can be delivered with high fidelity in routine service contexts.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio: 44559; ISTCRN: ISRCTN17062524. Registered on 11/02/2020.

A qualitative exploration of patient safety in a hospital setting in Spain: Policy and practice recommendations on patients' and companions' participation

INTRODUCTION

Patients' and companions' participation in healthcare could help prevent adverse events, which are a significant cause of disease and disability. Before designing interventions to increase participation, it is first necessary to identify attitudes to patient safety. This study aimed to explore patients' and companions' perceptions, attitudes and experiences of patient safety, taking into account contextual factors, such as cultural background, which are not usually captured in the literature.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study with a theoretical sampling of 13 inpatients and 3 companions in a university hospital in Barcelona, Spain. Information was obtained from individual and triangular interviews. A descriptive thematic content analysis was conducted by four analysts and a consensus was reached within the research team on the key categories that were identified. We also conducted a card-sorting exercise.

RESULTS

All informants emphasized the role of good communication with health professionals, a calm environment and the need for patient education. Discursive positions differed by cultural background. Informants from a Pakistani-Bangladeshi background emphasized language barriers, while those from European and Latin-American backgrounds stressed health professionals' lack of time and the need for more interdisciplinary teamwork. The card-sorting exercise identified several opportunities to enhance participation: checking patient identification and medication dispensation, and maintaining personal and environmental hygiene.

CONCLUSION

This exploration of informants' discourse on patient safety identified a wide variety of categories not usually considered from institutional perspectives. The findings of this study could enrich interventions in areas with diverse cultural backgrounds, as well as current frameworks based exclusively on institutional perspectives.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The results of the study were communicated to patients and accompanying persons via telephone or email. Similarly, a focus group was held with a patient forum to comment on the results. In the design of subsequent interventions to improve patient safety at the hospital, the proposals of patients and companions for their participation will be included together with healthcare professionals' opinions.

How do hospital inpatients conceptualise patient safety? A qualitative interview study using constructivist grounded theory

BACKGROUND

Efforts to involve patients in patient safety continue to revolve around professionally derived notions of minimising clinical risk, yet evidence suggests that patients hold perspectives on patient safety that are distinct from clinicians and academics. This study aims to understand how hospital inpatients across three different specialties conceptualise patient safety and develop a conceptual model that reflects their perspectives.

METHODS

A qualitative semi-structured interview study was conducted with 24 inpatients across three clinical specialties (medicine for the elderly, elective surgery and maternity) at a large central London teaching hospital. An abbreviated form of constructivist grounded theory was employed to analyse interview transcripts. Constant comparative analysis and memo-writing using the clustering technique were used to develop a model of how patients conceptualise patient safety.

RESULTS

While some patients described patient safety using terms consistent with clinical/academic definitions, patients predominantly conceptualised patient safety in the context of what made them 'feel safe'. Patients' feelings of safety arose from a range of care experiences involving specific actors: hospital staff, the patient, their friends/family/carers, and the healthcare organisation. Four types of experiences contributed to how patients conceptualise safety: actions observed by patients; actions received by patients; actions performed by patients themselves; and shared actions involving patients and other actors in their care.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the need for a patient safety paradigm that is meaningful to all stakeholders, incorporating what matters to patients to feel safe in hospital. Additional work should explore and test how the proposed conceptual model can be practically applied and implemented to incorporate the patient conceptualisation of patient safety into everyday clinical practice.

Involving patients and carers in patient safety in primary care: A qualitative study of a co-designed patient safety guide

BACKGROUND

Involving patients is a key premise of national and international policies on patient safety, which requires understanding how patients or carers want to be involved and developing resources to support this. This paper examines patients' and carers' views of being involved in patient safety in primary care and their views of potentially using a co-designed patient safety guide for primary care (PSG-PC) to foster both involvement and their safety.

METHODS

A qualitative study using semistructured face-to-face interviews with 18 patients and/or carers in primary care. Interviews were transcribed and analysis was conducted using an inductive thematic approach.

RESULTS

Overall participants expressed enthusiasm for the PSG-PC as a tool to support patients and carers to be involved in patient safety in primary care. However, for some participants being involved in patient safety was seen as taking on the role of General Practitioner and had the potential to add an additional workload for patients. Participants' willingness or ability to be involved in patient safety was influenced by a range of factors including an invisible, often underacknowledged role of everyday safety for patients' interactions with primary care; the levels of involvement that patients wanted in their care and safety and the work of embedding the PSG-PC for patients into their routine interactions with primary care. Participants identified components of the PSG-PC that would be useful to them, in particular, if they had a responsibility for caring for a family member if they had more complex care or long-term conditions.

CONCLUSION

Involving patients and carers in patient safety needs a tailored and personalized approach that enables patients and carers to use resources like the PSG-PC routinely and helps challenge assumptions about their willingness and ability to be involved in patient safety. Doing so would raise awareness of opportunities to be involved in safety in line with personal preference.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patient and public involvement were central to the research study. This included working in partnership to develop the PSG-PC with patients and carers and throughout our study including in the design of the study, recruiting participants, interpretation of findings.

A rapid review of interventions to improve medicine self-management for older people living at home

BACKGROUND

As people age, they are more likely to develop multiple long-term conditions that require complicated medicine regimens. Safely self-managing multiple medicines at home is challenging and how older people can be better supported to do so has not been fully explored.

AIM

This study aimed to identify interventions to improve medicine self-management for older people living at home and the aspects of medicine self-management that they address.

DESIGN

A rapid review was undertaken of publications up to April 2022. Eight databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: interventions aimed at people 65 years of age or older and their informal carers, living at home. Interventions needed to include at least one component of medicine self-management. Study protocols, conference papers, literature reviews and articles not in the English language were not included. The results from the review were reported through narrative synthesis, underpinned by the Resilient Healthcare theory.

RESULTS

Database searches returned 14,353 results. One hundred and sixty-seven articles were individually appraised (full-text screening) and 33 were included in the review. The majority of interventions identified were educational. In most cases, they aimed to improve older people's adherence and increase their knowledge of medicines. Only very few interventions addressed potential issues with medicine supply. Only a minority of interventions specifically targeted older people with either polypharmacy, multimorbidities or frailty.

CONCLUSION

To date, the emphasis in supporting older people to manage their medicines has been on the ability to adhere to medicine regimens. Most interventions identify and target deficiencies within the patient, rather than preparing patients for problems inherent in the medicine management system. Medicine self-management requires a much wider range of skills than taking medicines as prescribed. Interventions supporting older people to anticipate and respond to problems with their medicines may reduce the risk of harm associated with polypharmacy and may contribute to increased resilience in the system.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

A patient with lived experience of medicine self-management in older age contributed towards shaping the research question as well as the inclusion and exclusion criteria for this review. She is also the coauthor of this article. A patient advisory group oversaw the study.

Collecting Patient Feedback as a Means of Monitoring Patient Experience and Hospital Service Quality - Learning from a Government-led Initiative

PURPOSE

Patient feedback plays a significant role in hospital service improvement. However, how to encourage patient feedback that can guide hospital service improvement is still being explored. By examining patient feedback data related to a tertiary hospital in China that was collected from the "12345" Government Service Convenience Hotline (GSCH), the paper discusses the learnings from GSCH in encouraging patient feedback and how quality improvement initiatives have effected the number and types of complaints made by patients and their families via GSCH.

METHODS

The study retrospectively collected and analyzed complaints on a Tertiary General University-affiliated hospital made via GSCH between 2016 and 2020. Patient care process-related complaints were coded using the health care complaint analysis tool (HCAT) and other complaint data were categorized based on the nature of the complaints. The autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) models and mosaic plots were used to observe complaints trends and different complaint variables, respectively. The relationship between various quality improvement initiatives introduced since 2018 and patient complaints was also tested.

RESULTS

Close to 67% (n=2688) of calls made to the GSCH hotlines about the hospital were classified as a complaint including 60.6% vs 39.4% related to patient care process and nonpatient care process, respectively. For patient care process-related complaints, specifically against departments and personnel, 57.72% (n=961) were on clinical departments and 55.87% (n=471) were on doctors. Comparing the proportion of the complaint data in different categories in the two-year period of 2017-2018 and 2019-2020, an increase in management problems (47.73% vs 58.50%, P<0.001) and decrease in relationship problems (33.65% vs 25.69%, P=0.002) were recorded.

CONCLUSION

A unified, transparent, and impartial GSCH platform greatly encourages feedback from patients and families. Feedbacks provide evidence to guide health care organizations in improving the overall experience of patients and the quality of services that they provide.

Patient Voices in Hospital Safety during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Hospitalized patients and their families may be reluctant to express safety concerns. We aimed to describe safety and quality concerns experienced by hospitalized patients and families and factors and outcomes surrounding decisions about voicing concerns, including those related to the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 19 discharged inpatients or family members in a qualitative descriptive design. Some participants reported concern about staff competency or knowledge, communication and coordination, potential treatment errors, or care environment. Factors influencing feeling safe included healthcare team member characteristics, communication and coordination, and safe care expectations. Reasoning for voicing concerns often included personal characteristics. Reasons for not voicing concerns included feeling no action was needed or the concern was low priority. Outcomes for voicing a concern were categorized as resolved, disregarded, and unknown. These findings support the vital importance of open safety communication and trustworthy response to patients and family members who voice concerns.

Development and validation of a measure to assess patients' perceptions of their safety in an acute hospital setting

BACKGROUND

Safety measurement tools have traditionally examined safety climate and culture from the perspective of healthcare professionals. A small number of studies have used tools to measure patients' perceptions of safety.

AIM

To develop and check the validity of a questionnaire, the King's Patient Safety Measure (KPSM), that assesses how patients perceive their safety when receiving acute care.

DISCUSSION

A cross-sectional survey of 158 patients was undertaken that was constructed to establish the validity and reliability of a 13-item questionnaire. A general linear model statistically tested how patients perceived the safety of their care and whether those views were associated with covariates that included characteristics such as age, gender, ethnic identity, socio-economic factors, how long they stayed in hospital and the way they were admitted to hospital.

CONCLUSION

The KPSM is a validated tool consisting of a single factor that is internally consistent.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The KPSM is appropriate for and potentially applicable to a diverse range of patients and could act as an early warning tool.

Improving the safety and experience of transitions from hospital to home: a cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial of the 'Your Care Needs You' intervention versus usual care

BACKGROUND

The 'Your Care Needs You' (YCNY) intervention aims to increase the safety and experience of transitions for older people through greater patient involvement during the hospital stay.

METHODS

A cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial was conducted on NHS inpatient wards (clusters) where ≥ 40% of patients were routinely ≥ 75 years. Wards were randomised to YCNY or usual care using an unequal allocation ratio (3:2). We aimed to recruit up to 20 patients per ward. Follow-up included routine data collection and questionnaires at 5-, 30-, and 90-days post-discharge. Eligible patients were ≥ 75 years, discharged home, stayed overnight on participating wards, and could read and understand English. The trial assessed the feasibility of delivering YCNY and the trial methodology through recruitment rates, outcome completion rates, and a qualitative evaluation. The accuracy of using routinely coded data for the primary outcome in the definitive trial was assessed by extracting discharge information for up to ten nonindividual consenting patients per ward.

RESULTS

Ten wards were randomised (6 intervention, 4 control). One ward withdrew, and two wards were unable to deliver the intervention. Seven-hundred twenty-one patients were successfully screened, and 161 were recruited (95 intervention, 66 control). The patient post-discharge attrition rate was 17.4% (n = 28). Primary outcome data were gathered for 91.9% of participants with 75.2% and 59.0% providing secondary outcome data at 5 and 30 days post-discharge respectively. Item completion within questionnaires was generally high. Post-discharge follow-up was terminated early due to the COVID-19 pandemic affecting 90-day response rates (16.8%). Data from 88 nonindividual consenting patients identified an error rate of 15% when using routinely coded data for the primary outcome. No unexpected serious adverse events were identified. Most patients viewed YCNY favourably. Staff agreed with it in principle, but ward pressures and organisational contexts hampered implementation. There was a need to sustain engagement, provide clarity on roles and responsibilities, and account for fluctuations in patients' health, capacity, and preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

If implementation challenges can be overcome, YCNY represents a step towards involving older people as partners in their care to improve the safety and experience of their transitions from hospital to home.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN: 51154948.

Feasibility of the SINERGIAPS ("Sinergias entre profesionales y pacientes para una Atención Primaria Segura") intervention for improving patient safety in primary care

AIM

The primary aim was to examine the feasibility of intervention delivery and of trial procedures. Secondary aims were to study the intervention uptake; its acceptability and perceived utility; and its potential to improve safety culture and avoidable hospital admissions.

METHODS

We conducted a 3-month, single-arm feasibility study in 10 primary care (PC) centres in Spain. Centres received information regarding patients' experiences of safety (through the Patient Reported Experiences and Outcomes of Safety in Primary Care [PREOS-PC] questionnaire), and were instructed to plan safety improvements based on that feedback. We used a bespoke online tool to recruit PC professionals, collect patient feedback, and deliver it to the centres, and to collect outcome data (patient safety culture [Medical Office Survey on Patient Safety Culture, MOSPSC questionnaire]). We measured recruitment and follow-up rates and intervention uptake (based on the number of safety improvement plans registered). We conducted semistructured interviews with 9 professionals to explore the intervention acceptability and perceived utility.

RESULTS

Of 256 professionals invited, 120 (47%) agreed to participate, and 97 completed baseline and postintervention measures. Of 780 patients invited, 585 (75%) completed the PREOS-PC questionnaire. Five of 10 centres (50%) designed an improvement plan, providing 27 plans in total (range per centre, 1-14). The intervention was perceived as a novel strategy for improving safety, although the healthcare professionals identified several factors limiting its acceptability and utility: lack of feedback at the individual professional level; potentially unrepresentative sample of patients providing feedback; and number of educational materials deemed overwhelming.

DISCUSSION

It is feasible to deliver the proposed intervention so long as the identified limitations are addressed.

To what extent are patients involved in researching safety in acute mental healthcare?

BACKGROUND

There is a growing need to involve patients in the development of patient safety interventions. Mental health services, despite their strong history of patient involvement, have been slow to develop patient safety interventions, particularly in inpatient settings.

METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken of both academic and grey literature. Whilst no lay member of the team worked directly on the review, they were part of the project steering group which provided oversight throughout the review process. This included people with lived experience of mental health services. From a research perspective the main focus for lay members was in co-producing the digital technology, the key project output. Smits et al.'s (Res Involv Engagem 6:1-30, 2020) Involvement Matrix was used to taxonomise levels of patient involvement. Studies were included if they were set in any inpatient mental health care context regardless of design. The quality of all selected studies was appraised using Mixed Methods Appraisal Methodology (MMAT).

RESULTS

Fifty-two studies were classified, synthesised and their levels of patient involvement in the research and development of patient safety interventions were taxonomised. Almost two-thirds of studies (n = 33) researched reducing restrictive practices. Only four studies reported engaging patients in the research process as decision-makers, with the remaining studies divided almost equally between engaging patients in the research process as partners, advisors and co-thinkers. Just under half of all studies engaged patients in just one stage of the research process.

CONCLUSION

Involvement of patients in researching patient safety and developing interventions in an inpatient mental health context seems diverse in its nature. Researchers need to both more fully consider and better describe their approaches to involving patients in safety research in inpatient mental health. Doing so will likely lead to the development of higher quality safety interventions.

Development and validation of patients' surgical safety checklist

Background

Poor uptake and understanding of critical perioperative information represent a major safety risk for surgical patients. Implementing a patient-driven surgical safety checklist might enhance the way critical information is given and increase patient involvement in their own safety throughout the surgical pathway. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a Surgical Patient Safety Checklist (PASC) for use by surgical patients.

Method

This was a prospective study, involving patient representatives, multidisciplinary healthcare professionals and elective surgical patients to develop and validate PASC using consensus-building techniques in two Norwegian hospitals. A set of items intended for PASC were rated by patients and then submitted to Content Validation Index (CVI) analyses. Items of low CVI went through a Healthcare Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (HFMEA) Hazard Scoring process, as well as a consensus process before they were either kept or discarded. Reliability of patients’ PASC ratings was assessed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient analysis. Lastly, the face validity of PASC was investigated through focus group interviews with postoperative patients.

Results

Initial development of PASC resulted in a checklist consisting of two parts, one before (32 items) and one after surgery (26 items). After achieving consensus on the PASC content, 215 surgical patients from six surgical wards rated the items for the CVI analysis on a 1-4 scale and mostly agreed on the content. Five items were removed from the checklist, and six items were redesigned to improve PASCs’ user-friendliness. The total Scale-level index/Average (S-CVI/Ave) before revision was 0.83 and 0.86 for pre- and post-operative PASC items, respectively. Following revision, these increased to 0.86 and 0.93, respectively. The PASC items reliability score was 0.97 (95% confidence interval 0.96 to 0.98). The qualitative assessment identified that patients who used PASC felt more in control of their situation; this was achieved when PASC was given to them at what they felt was the right time and healthcare professionals took part in its usage.

Conclusion

Multidisciplinary perioperative care staff and surgical patients agreed upon PASC content, the checklist ratings were reliable, and qualitative assessment suggested good face validity. PASC appears to be a usable and valid checklist for elective surgical patients across specialties.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07470-z.

Enriching the Value of Patient Experience Feedback: Web-Based Dashboard Development Using Co-design and Heuristic Evaluation

Background

There is an abundance of patient experience data held within health care organizations, but stakeholders and staff are often unable to use the output in a meaningful and timely way to improve care delivery. Dashboards, which use visualized data to summarize key patient experience feedback, have the potential to address these issues.

Objective

The aim of this study is to develop a patient experience dashboard with an emphasis on Friends and Family Test (FFT) reporting, as per the national policy drive.

Methods

A 2-stage approach was used—participatory co-design involving 20 co-designers to develop a dashboard prototype, followed by iterative dashboard testing. Language analysis was performed on free-text patient experience data from the FFT, and the themes and sentiments generated were used to populate the dashboard with associated FFT metrics. Heuristic evaluation and usability testing were conducted to refine the dashboard and assess user satisfaction using the system usability score.

Results

The qualitative analysis from the co-design process informed the development of the dashboard prototype with key dashboard requirements and a significant preference for bubble chart display. The heuristic evaluation revealed that most cumulative scores had no usability problems (18/20, 90%), had cosmetic problems only (7/20, 35%), or had minor usability problems (5/20, 25%). The mean System Usability Scale score was 89.7 (SD 7.9), suggesting an excellent rating.

Conclusions

The growing capacity to collect and process patient experience data suggests that data visualization will be increasingly important in turning feedback into improvements to care. Through heuristic usability, we demonstrated that very large FFT data can be presented in a thematically driven, simple visual display without the loss of the nuances and still allow for the exploration of the original free-text comments. This study establishes guidance for optimizing the design of patient experience dashboards that health care providers find meaningful, which in turn drives patient-centered care.

Process evaluations undertaken alongside randomised controlled trials in the hospital setting: A scoping review

Background

There is increasing recognition of the importance of undertaking process evaluations alongside implementation of health interventions by examining mechanisms of impact and contextual factors. However, a comprehensive synthesis of process evaluations undertaken alongside clinical trials in hospital settings is lacking. We undertook a scoping review to address this gap.

Methods

This review was guided by the methodological framework for scoping studies. Studies were identified using four databases; Ovid Medline, EBSCO CINAHL, EMBASE and Scopus. Two authors independently screened all titles and available abstracts, with a third author available to adjudicate. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they described a process evaluation undertaken alongside a randomised controlled trial in the hospital setting. Data were abstracted by one author and checked by two others and analysed both descriptively and using inductive content analysis.

Results

Data were extracted from 30 articles reporting on 15 trials, most of which were cluster randomised trials (c-RTs) (n = 12). The most common data collection methods used in process evaluations were interviews, questionnaires or surveys, and records or logs. Data analysis revealed three themes relative to how authors: use process data to interpret, understand and explain trial outcomes; evaluate responses to the intervention; and consider the implementation context.

Conclusions

Findings from this review demonstrate the complex nature of intervention implementation in the hospital setting. Overall, there is need for standardised reporting of process evaluations and more explicit descriptions of how authors use frameworks to guide their evaluation.

Efficacy of educational strategies in patient involvement for safety in care: a systematic review

ABSTRACT Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of educational strategies in the involvement of hospitalized adult patient for safety in care. Method Systematic review carried out by searching for experimental and quasi-experimental studies, published from January/2010 to December/2021, in PubMed®, Cochrane Library CENTRAL, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, CINAHL and EMBASE. Results Twelve studies were included to involve the patient in safe care practices, five (41.7%) experimental and seven (58.3%) quasi-experimental. Different educational strategies were adopted in the articles included: verbal guidance, books, leaflets and folders (n=4; 33.3%); videos, e-books and electronic applications (n=5; 41.7%); poster, leaflets and video (n=3; 25%). Four experimental studies had a high risk of bias (80%) and all quasi-experimental studies had a low risk of bias (100%). Conclusion The use of educational strategies proved to be effective in involving the patient in safe care practices. Considering the heterogeneity between studies, it is recommended carrying out future research.

A Systematic Review of Patient-Report Safety Climate Measures in Health Care

OBJECTIVES

Patients are a valuable, yet underutilized source of information for safety measurement and improvement in health care. The aim of this review was to identify patient-report safety climate (SC) measures described in the literature, analyze the included items to consider their alignment with previously established SC domains, evaluate their validity and reliability, and make recommendations for best practice in using patient-report measures of SC in health care.

METHODS

Searches were conducted, with no limit on publication year, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Academic Search Complete in November 2019. Reference lists of included studies and existing reviews were also screened. English-language, peer-reviewed studies that described the development or use of a patient-report measure to assess SC in health care were included. Two researchers independently extracted data from studies and applied a quality appraisal tool.

RESULTS

A total of 5060 studies were screened, with 44 included. Included studies described 31 different SC measures. There was much variability in the coverage of SC domains across included measures. Poor measure quality was marked by inadequacies in the testing and reporting of validity and reliability. There was also a lack of usability testing among measures.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified the extant patient-reported SC measures in health care and demonstrated significant variance in their coverage of SC domains, validity and reliability, and usability. Findings suggest a pressing need for a stand-alone measure that has a high validity and reliability, and assess core SC domains from the patient perspective, particularly in primary care.

Unique Patient-Reported Hospital Safety Concerns With Online Tool: MySafeCare

BACKGROUND

Hospitalized patients and their care partners have valuable and unique perspectives of the medical care they receive. Direct and real-time reporting of patients' safety concerns, though limited in the acute care setting, could provide opportunities to improve patient care.

METHODS

We implemented the MySafeCare (MSC) application on six acute care units for 18 months as part of a patient-centered health information technology intervention to promote engagement and safety in the acute care setting. The web-based application allowed hospitalized patients to submit safety concerns anonymously and in real time. We describe characteristics of patient submissions including their categorizations. We evaluated rates of submissions to MSC and compared them with rates of submissions to the Patient Family Relations department at the hospital. In addition, we performed thematic analysis of narrative concerns submitted to the application.

RESULTS

We received 46 submissions to MSC and 33% of concerns received were anonymous. The overall rate of submissions was 0.6 submissions per 1000 patient-days and was considerably lower than the rate of submissions to the Patient Family Relations during the same period (4.1 per 1000 patient-days). Identified themes of narrative concerns included unmet care needs and preferences, inadequate communication, and concerns about safety of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the submission rate to the application was low, MSC captured important content directly from hospitalized patients or their care partners. A web-based patient safety reporting tool for patients should be studied further to understand patient and care partner use and willingness to engage, as well as potential effects on patient safety outcomes.

Eficácia de estratégias educativas no envolvimento do paciente para a segurança no cuidado: revisão sistemática

RESUMO Objetivo Avaliar a eficácia de estratégias educativas no envolvimento do paciente adulto hospitalizado para a segurança no cuidado. Método Revisão sistemática realizada por meio da busca de estudos experimentais e quase-experimentais, publicados de janeiro/2010 a dezembro/2021, no PubMed®, Cochrane Library CENTRAL, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, CINAHL e EMBASE. Resultados Foram incluídos doze estudos para envolver o paciente nas práticas seguras do cuidado, cinco (41,7%) experimentais e sete (58,3%) quase experimentais. Diferentes estratégias educativas foram adotadas nos artigos incluídos: orientações verbais, livretos, folhetos e folders (n=4; 33,3%); vídeos, e-book e aplicativos eletrônicos (n=5; 41,7%); pôster, folhetos e vídeo (n=3; 25%). Quatro estudos experimentais apresentaram alto risco de viés (80%) e todos quase-experimentais baixo risco de viés (100%). Conclusão O uso de estratégias educativas se demonstrou eficaz no envolvimento do paciente em práticas seguras do cuidado. Recomenda-se a condução de futuras pesquisas ao se considerar a heterogeneidade entre os estudos.

Effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership on health services planning, delivery and evaluation

BACKGROUND

Health services have traditionally been developed to focus on specific diseases or medical specialties. Involving consumers as partners in planning, delivering and evaluating health services may lead to services that are person-centred and so better able to meet the needs of and provide care for individuals. Globally, governments recommend consumer involvement in healthcare decision-making at the systems level, as a strategy for promoting person-centred health services. However, the effects of this 'working in partnership' approach to healthcare decision-making are unclear. Working in partnership is defined here as collaborative relationships between at least one consumer and health provider, meeting jointly and regularly in formal group formats, to equally contribute to and collaborate on health service-related decision-making in real time. In this review, the terms 'consumer' and 'health provider' refer to partnership participants, and 'health service user' and 'health service provider' refer to trial participants. This review of effects of partnership interventions was undertaken concurrently with a Cochrane Qualitative Evidence Synthesis (QES) entitled Consumers and health providers working in partnership for the promotion of person-centred health services: a co-produced qualitative evidence synthesis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership, as an intervention to promote person-centred health services.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases from 2000 to April 2019; PROQUEST Dissertations and Theses Global from 2016 to April 2019; and grey literature and online trial registries from 2000 until September 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster-RCTs of 'working in partnership' interventions meeting these three criteria: both consumer and provider participants meet; they meet jointly and regularly in formal group formats; and they make actual decisions that relate to the person-centredness of health service(s).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened most titles and abstracts. One review author screened a subset of titles and abstracts (i.e. those identified through clinical trials registries searches, those classified by the Cochrane RCT Classifier as unlikely to be an RCT, and those identified through other sources). Two review authors independently screened all full texts of potentially eligible articles for inclusion. In case of disagreement, they consulted a third review author to reach consensus. One review author extracted data and assessed risk of bias for all included studies and a second review author independently cross-checked all data and assessments. Any discrepancies were resolved by discussion, or by consulting a third review author to reach consensus. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the small number of included trials and their heterogeneity; we synthesised results descriptively by comparison and outcome. We reported the following outcomes in GRADE 'Summary of findings' tables: health service alterations; the degree to which changed service reflects health service user priorities; health service users' ratings of health service performance; health service users' health service utilisation patterns; resources associated with the decision-making process; resources associated with implementing decisions; and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five trials (one RCT and four cluster-RCTs), with 16,257 health service users and more than 469 health service providers as trial participants. For two trials, the aims of the partnerships were to directly improve the person-centredness of health services (via health service planning, and discharge co-ordination). In the remaining trials, the aims were indirect (training first-year medical doctors on patient safety) or broader in focus (which could include person-centredness of health services that targeted the public/community, households or health service delivery to improve maternal and neonatal mortality). Three trials were conducted in high income-countries, one was in a middle-income country and one was in a low-income country. Two studies evaluated working in partnership interventions, compared to usual practice without partnership (Comparison 1); and three studies evaluated working in partnership as part of a multi-component intervention, compared to the same intervention without partnership (Comparison 2). No studies evaluated one form of working in partnership compared to another (Comparison 3). The effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership compared to usual practice without partnership are uncertain: only one of the two studies that assessed this comparison measured health service alteration outcomes, and data were not usable, as only intervention group data were reported. Additionally, none of the included studies evaluating this comparison measured the other primary or secondary outcomes we sought for the 'Summary of findings' table. We are also unsure about the effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership as part of a multi-component intervention compared to the same intervention without partnership. Very low-certainty evidence indicated there may be little or no difference on health service alterations or health service user health service performance ratings (two studies); or on health service user health service utilisation patterns and adverse events (one study each). No studies evaluating this comparison reported the degree to which health service alterations reflect health service user priorities, or resource use. Overall, our confidence in the findings about the effects of working in partnership interventions was very low due to indirectness, imprecision and publication bias, and serious concerns about risk of selection bias; performance bias, detection bias and reporting bias in most studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of consumers and providers working in partnership as an intervention, or as part of a multi-component intervention, are uncertain, due to a lack of high-quality evidence and/or due to a lack of studies. Further well-designed RCTs with a clear focus on assessing outcomes directly related to partnerships for patient-centred health services are needed in this area, which may also benefit from mixed-methods and qualitative research to build the evidence base.

Codesigning consumer engagement strategies with ethnic minority consumers in Australian cancer services: the CanEngage Project protocol

INTRODUCTION

Consumer engagement is central to high-quality cancer service delivery and is a recognised strategy to minimise healthcare-associated harm. Strategies developed to enhance consumer engagement specifically in relation to preventing healthcare harm include questioning health professionals, raising concerns about possible mistakes or risks in care and encouraging patients and caregivers to report suspected errors. Patients from ethnic minority backgrounds are particularly vulnerable to unsafe care, but current engagement strategies have not been developed specifically for (and with) this population. Using an adapted approach to experience-based codesign (EBCD) to support the target population, the aim of the project is to codesign consumer engagement interventions to increase consumer engagement and safety in New South Wales and Victorian cancer inpatient, outpatient and day procedure services.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A mixed-method project will be undertaken at six study sites. Our EBCD approach includes a preparatory phase in which we will provide training and support to the codesign participants, in addition to recruiting and training consumer cofacilitators for the codesign workshops. The project will follow the EBCD process of gathering and synthesising observational data from each cancer service, with interview data from consumers and staff. With the resulting in-depth understanding of the safety threats commonly experienced by ethnic minority consumers in each site, we will work through feedback events and codesign groups with consumers and staff to determine how they can be more involved with their care to minimise the potential for patient harm. Consumer engagement interventions will be coproduced in each of the six participating services that are tailored to the ethnic minority populations served.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been obtained from the Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee. The project will provide strategies for ethnic minority consumers to engage with cancer services to minimise healthcare-associated harm that may be applied to diverse healthcare settings.

Health professionals' perspectives of safety issues in mental health services: A qualitative study

The study aimed to explore mental health professionals' perceptions of patient safety issues across community and inpatient mental health services. Fourteen mental health professionals across community and inpatient settings participated in qualitative interviews. Framework analysis, guided by the Yorkshire Contributory Factors Framework - Mental Health, was used to analyse the data. Safety issues identified by mental health professionals mapped on to 19 of the 21 factors in the Yorkshire Contributory Factors Framework - Mental Health. The factors most frequently mentioned by participants were 'safety culture' which focused on raising concerns, learning from incidents and the influence of targets; 'communication systems' to support effective communication between staff; 'service user factors' including a perceived increase in illness acuity; 'service process' including how patients access and interact with services; and 'staff workload' perceived being as unmanageable. Mental health professionals consider there to be a broad range of safety issues associated with mental health services. Future research should aim to develop interventions to improve safety focused across the factors raised by professionals.

Health system responsiveness: a systematic evidence mapping review of the global literature

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organisation framed responsiveness, fair financing and equity as intrinsic goals of health systems. However, of the three, responsiveness received significantly less attention. Responsiveness is essential to strengthen systems' functioning; provide equitable and accountable services; and to protect the rights of citizens. There is an urgency to make systems more responsive, but our understanding of responsiveness is limited. We therefore sought to map existing evidence on health system responsiveness.

METHODS

A mixed method systemized evidence mapping review was conducted. We searched PubMed, EbscoHost, and Google Scholar. Published and grey literature; conceptual and empirical publications; published between 2000 and 2020 and English language texts were included. We screened titles and abstracts of 1119 publications and 870 full texts.

RESULTS

Six hundred twenty-one publications were included in the review. Evidence mapping shows substantially more publications between 2011 and 2020 (n = 462/621) than earlier periods. Most of the publications were from Europe (n = 139), with more publications relating to High Income Countries (n = 241) than Low-to-Middle Income Countries (n = 217). Most were empirical studies (n = 424/621) utilized quantitative methodologies (n = 232), while qualitative (n = 127) and mixed methods (n = 63) were more rare. Thematic analysis revealed eight primary conceptualizations of 'health system responsiveness', which can be fitted into three dominant categorizations: 1) unidirectional user-service interface; 2) responsiveness as feedback loops between users and the health system; and 3) responsiveness as accountability between public and the system.

CONCLUSIONS

This evidence map shows a substantial body of available literature on health system responsiveness, but also reveals evidential gaps requiring further development, including: a clear definition and body of theory of responsiveness; the implementation and effectiveness of feedback loops; the systems responses to this feedback; context-specific mechanism-implementation experiences, particularly, of LMIC and fragile-and conflict affected states; and responsiveness as it relates to health equity, minority and vulnerable populations. Theoretical development is required, we suggest separating ideas of services and systems responsiveness, applying a stronger systems lens in future work. Further agenda-setting and resourcing of bridging work on health system responsiveness is suggested.

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.

Nurse Sensemaking for Responding to Patient and Family Safety Concerns

BACKGROUND

Hospitals need to prevent, respond to, and learn from safety risks and events perceived by patients and families, who in turn rely on nurses to respond to and report their safety concerns.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to describe the process by which bedside nurses evaluate and determine the appropriate response to safety concerns expressed by patients or their families.

METHODS

A qualitative design was employed. We recruited inpatient bedside nurses in an 811-bed Midwest academic medical center. Nurses provided demographic information and participated in semistructured interviews designed to elicit narratives related to evaluation and response to patient- or family-expressed safety concerns. Data analysis and interpretation were guided by grounded theory.

RESULTS

We enrolled 25 nurses representing 22 units. Based on these nurses' experiences, we developed a grounded theory explaining how nurses evaluate a patient or family safety concern. Nurses make sense of the patient's or family's safety concern in order to take action. Achieving this goal requires evaluation of the meaningfulness and reasonableness of the concern, as well as the potential effect of the concern on the patient. Based on this nursing evaluation, nurses respond in ways designed to (a) manage emotions, (b) immediately resolve concerns, (c) involve other team members, and (d) address fear or uncertain grounding in reality. Nurses reported routinely handling safety concerns at the bedside without use of incident reporting.

DISCUSSION

Safety requires an interpersonal and evaluative nursing process with actions responsive to patient and family concerns. Safety interventions designed to be used by nurses should be developed with the dynamic, cognitive, sensemaking nature of nurses' routine safety work in mind. Being sensitive to the vulnerability of patients, respecting patient and family input, and understanding the consequences of dismissing patient and family safety concerns are critical to making sense of the situation and taking appropriate action to maintain safety. Measuring patient safety or planning improvement based on patient or family expression of safety concerns would be a difficult undertaking using only standard approaches. A more complex approach incorporating direct patient engagement in data collection is necessary to gain a complete safety picture.

Implementing Patient and Family Involvement Interventions for Promoting Patient Safety: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aims of the study were to evaluate and to quantify the effects of patient and family involvement (PFI) interventions on patient safety by synthesizing the available global data.

METHODS

Four databases were searched to identify relevant studies that have assessed the impact of PFI on patient safety up to March 2019. Reference lists of potential selected articles were also used to identify additional relevant studies. Effect sizes (ESs) were calculated using random and fixed effects models. Statistical heterogeneity was measured using the I2 test.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies met the review criteria. The meta-analysis showed that PFI were beneficial in significantly reducing adverse events (ES = -0.240, P < 0.001), decreasing the length of hospital stay (ES = -0.122, P < 0.001), increasing patient safety experiences (ES = 0.630, P = 0.007), and improving patient satisfaction (ES = 0.268, P = 0.004). However, the PFI interventions did not significantly enhance the perception of patient safety (ES = 0.205, P = 0.09) or the quality of life (ES = 0.057, P = 0.61). Moreover, moderate-to-high heterogeneity was found for all impacts except adverse events (I2 = 0%) and length of hospital stay (I2 = 35%). A funnel plot indicated a low degree of publication bias for the adverse event outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The synthesized evidence in this review demonstrates the benefits of PFI for promoting patient safety. However, further studies should extend the research scope to fill the existing gaps for both the type of PFI interventions and the patient safety outcomes.

Mixed-Methods Evaluation of Real-Time Safety Reporting by Hospitalized Patients and Their Care Partners: The MySafeCare Application

OBJECTIVE

The aims of the study were to evaluate the amount and content of data patients and care partners reported using a real-time electronic safety tool compared with other reporting mechanisms and to understand their perspectives on safety concerns and reporting in the hospital.

METHODS

This study used mixed methods including 20-month preimplementation and postimplementation trial evaluating MySafeCare, a web-based application, which allows hospitalized patients/care partners to report safety concerns in real time. The study compared MySafeCare submission rates for three hospital units (oncology acute care, vascular intermediate care, medical intensive care) with submissions rates of Patient Family Relations (PFR) Department, a hospital service to address patient/family concerns. The study used triangulation of quantitative data with thematic analysis of safety concern submissions and patient/care partner interviews to understand submission content and perspectives on safety reporting.

RESULTS

Thirty-two MySafeCare submissions were received with an average rate of 1.7 submissions per 1000 patient-days and a range of 0.3 to 4.8 submissions per 1000 patient-days across all units, indicating notable variation between units. MySafeCare submission rates were significantly higher than PFR submission rates during the postintervention period on the vascular unit (4.3 [95% confidence interval = 2.8-6.5] versus 1.5 [95% confidence interval = 0.7-3.1], Poisson) (P = 0.01). Overall trends indicated a decrease in PFR submissions after MySafeCare implementation. Triangulated data indicated patients preferred to report anonymously and did not want concerns submitted directly to their care team.

CONCLUSIONS

MySafeCare evaluation confirmed the potential value of providing an electronic, anonymous reporting tool in the hospital to capture safety concerns in real time. Such applications should be tested further as part of patient safety programs.

Patients and relatives as auditors of safe practices in oncology and hematology day hospitals

BACKGROUND

When there is a gap in professionals' adherence to safe practices during cancer treatment, the consequences can be serious. Identifying these gaps in order to enable improvements in patient safety can be a challenge. This study aimed to assess if cancer patients and their relatives can be given the skills to audit reliably four safe practices, and to explore whether they are willing to play this new role.

METHODS

We recruited 136 participants in 2018, from the oncology and haematology day hospital of a tertiary hospital in Spain. Patient identification, hand hygiene, blood or chemotherapy identification, and side effects related to transfusion and chemotherapy, were the safe practices selected for evaluation. The study comprised two parts: an interventional educational program and a cross-sectional design to collect data and assess to what degree participants are able and willing to be auditors depending on their characteristics using multivariate logistic regression models. A participant's auditing skill were assessed pre and post the educational intervention.

RESULTS

The model was seeking predictors of being a good auditor. 63 participants (46.3%) were classified as good auditors after the training. To have younger age, higher educational level and to have had an experience of an adverse event were associated with a higher probability of being a good auditor. Additionally, 106 (77.9%) participants said that they would like to audit anonymously the professionals' compliance of at least three of four safe practices. The willingness to audit safe practices differed depending on the safe practice but these differences did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

The data gathered by patients and relatives acting as auditors can provide healthcare organizations with valuable information about safety and quality of care that is not accessible otherwise. This new role provides an innovative way to engage patients and their families' in healthcare safety where other methods have not had success. The paper sets out the methods that healthcare organizations need to undertake to enrol and train patients and relatives in an auditor role.

TRANSLATION AND TRANSCULTURAL ADAPTATION OF THE PATIENT MEASURE OF SAFETY (PMOS) QUESTIONNAIRE TO BRAZILIAN PORTUGUESE

ABSTRACT Objective to translate and culturally adapt the Patient Measure of Safety questionnaire to Brazilian Portuguese. Method a transcultural adaptation study conducted in six stages: translation, synthesis, back-translation, review by experts committee, pre-test, and presentation of the documentation of the entire process to the authors of the instrument. Results in the initial translation and cultural adaptation stage, two versions of the questionnaire were generated. The divergences between both versions and other suggestions were discussed, and the decisions were made by consensus, thus creating a single version. In the back-translation stage, there were no significant differences between the versions and the original instrument. The assessment of the semantic, idiomatic, cultural and conceptual equivalences of the Patient Measure of Safety items was performed by a committee of experts from different Brazilian regions. The results of the content validity index were above 0.9 for most of the items. The pre-test was conducted with 30 patients. The mean time for the application of the questionnaire was 31.9 minutes. In relation to the understanding of the items by the patients, a regular or poor interpretation was identified only for 6 of the 44 items, which were modified. Conclusion the “Questionário de Avaliação da Segurança pelo Paciente”, name given to the translated and transculturally adapted version, resulted from a thoughtful process, presenting consistency in the equivalence of the translation and constituting an applicable instrument understood by the target population.

Measuring and monitoring perioperative patient safety: a basic approach for clinicians

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recent research points to considerable rates of preventable perioperative patient harm and anaesthesiologists' concerns about eroding patient safety. Anaesthesia has always been at the forefront of patient safety improvement initiatives. However, factual local safety improvement requires local measurement, which may be afflicted by barriers to data collection and improvement activities. Because many of these barriers are related to mandatory reporting, the focus of this review is on measurement methods that can be used by practicing anaesthesiologists as self-improvement tools, even independently from mandatory reporting, and using basic techniques widely available in most institutions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Four mutually complementary measurement approaches may be suited for local patient safety learning: incident and rate-based measurements, staff surveys and patient surveys. Reportedly, individual methods have helped to tailor problem solutions and to reduce patient harm, morbidity, and mortality.

SUMMARY

Considering the potential for perioperative patient safety measurements to improve patient outcomes, the absence of a generally accepted measurement standard and manifold barriers to reporting, a pragmatic approach to locally measuring patient safety appears advisable.

Improving patient experience and safety at transitions of care through the Your Care Needs You (YCNY) intervention: a study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial

Background

Patients, particularly older people, often experience safety issues when transitioning from hospital to home. Although the evidence is currently equivocal as to how we can improve this transition of care, interventions that support patient involvement may be more effective. The ‘Your Care Needs You’ (YCNY) intervention supports patients to ‘know more’ and ‘do more’ whilst in hospital in order that they better understand their health condition and medications, maintain their daily activities, and can seek help at home if required. The intervention aims to reduce emergency hospital readmissions and improve safety and experience during the transition to home.

Methods

As part of the Partners At Care Transitions (PACT) programme of research, a multi-centred cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) will be conducted to explore the feasibility of the YCNY intervention and trial methodology. Data will be used to refine the intervention and develop a protocol for a definitive cRCT.

Ten acute hospital wards (the clusters) from varying medical specialties including older peoples’ medicine, trauma and orthopaedics, cardiology, intermediate care, and stroke will be randomised to deliver YCNY or usual care on a 3:2 basis. Up to 200 patients aged 75 years and over and discharged to their own homes will be recruited to the study. Patients will complete follow-up questionnaires at 5-, 30-, and 90-days post-discharge and readmission data up to 90-days post-discharge will be extracted from their medical records.

Study outcomes will include measures of feasibility (e.g. screening, recruitment, and retention data) and processes required to collect routine data at a patient and ward level. In addition, interviews and observations involving up to 24 patients/carers and 28 staff will be conducted to qualitatively assess the acceptability, usefulness, and feasibility of the intervention and implementation package to patients and staff. A separate sub-study will be conducted to explore how accurately primary outcome data (30-day emergency hospital readmissions) can be gathered for the definitive cRCT.

Discussion

This study will establish the feasibility of the YCNY intervention which aims to improve safety and experience during transitions of care. It will identify key methodological and implementation issues that need to be addressed prior to assessing the effectiveness of the YCNY intervention in a definitive cluster randomised controlled trial.

Trial registration

UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio: 42191; ISTCRN: ISRCTN51154948. Registered 16/07/2019.

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.

The nature of patient complaints: a resource for healthcare improvements

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore the nature, potential usefulness and meaning of complaints lodged by patients and their relatives.

DESIGN

A retrospective, descriptive design was used.

SETTING

The study was based on a sample of formal patient complaints made through a patient complaint reporting system for publicly funded healthcare services in Sweden.

PARTICIPANTS

A systematic random sample of 170 patient complaints was yielded from a total of 5689 patient complaints made in a Swedish county in 2015.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Themes emerging from patient complaints analysed using a qualitative thematic method.

RESULTS

The patient complaints reported patients' or their relatives' experiences of disadvantages and problems faced when seeking healthcare services. The meanings of the complaints reflected six themes regarding access to healthcare services, continuity and follow-up, incidents and patient harm, communication, attitudes and approaches, and healthcare options pursued against the patient's wishes.

CONCLUSIONS

The patient complaints analysed in this study clearly indicate a number of specific areas that commonly give rise to dissatisfaction; however, the key findings point to the significance of patients' exposure and vulnerability. The findings suggest that communication needs to be improved overall and that patient vulnerability could be successfully reduced with a strong interpersonal focus. Prerequisites for meeting patients' needs include accounting for patients' preferences and views both at the individual and organizational levels.

We Want to Know-A Mixed Methods Evaluation of a Comprehensive Program Designed to Detect and Address Patient-Reported Breakdowns in Care

BACKGROUND

Patients have important insights into care experiences, including breakdowns, but are often reluctant to speak up. The We Want to Know (WWTK) program was designed to make it easy for hospitalized patients to speak up about breakdowns in care and receive a response.

METHODS

The WWTK program was implemented from June 2014 through May 2017 at a large, community hospital in Baltimore. Core program features include (1) multiple channels for patients to report breakdowns, (2) campaign materials to increase patient awareness of the WWTK program, and (3) a specialist to facilitate resolution of breakdowns. This program was evaluated using mixed methods to assess the frequency and type of reported breakdowns, patient awareness of the program, and stakeholder perspectives.

RESULTS

WWTK specialists interviewed 4,676 patients; 822 (17.6%) reported a breakdown in care. Of these, 313 (38.1%) had not spoken with anyone at the hospital about the breakdown, and 547 (66.5%) described associated harm. There were also 55 patient-initiated reports to WWTK; 41 (74.5%) of these reported a care breakdown. Patients had not spoken with anyone at the hospital in 12 (29.3%) patient-initiated cases; 38 (92.7%) described associated harm. Hospital stakeholders found the level of detail and timeliness of reports to be helpful.

CONCLUSION

Active outreach to hospitalized patients detects substantially more breakdowns in care than patient-initiated reporting. Both approaches identify breakdowns that are consequential to patients and provide opportunities to respond to individual patients.

Postoperative Remote Automated Monitoring and Virtual Hospital-to-Home Care System Following Cardiac and Major Vascular Surgery: User Testing Study

Background

Cardiac and major vascular surgeries are common surgical procedures associated with high rates of postsurgical complications and related hospital readmission. In-hospital remote automated monitoring (RAM) and virtual hospital-to-home patient care systems have major potential to improve patient outcomes following cardiac and major vascular surgery. However, the science of deploying and evaluating these systems is complex and subject to risk of implementation failure.

Objective

As a precursor to a randomized controlled trial (RCT), this user testing study aimed to examine user performance and acceptance of a RAM and virtual hospital-to-home care intervention, using Philip’s Guardian and Electronic Transition to Ambulatory Care (eTrAC) technologies, respectively.

Methods

Nurses and patients participated in systems training and individual case-based user testing at two participating sites in Canada and the United Kingdom. Participants were video recorded and asked to think aloud while completing required user tasks and while being rated on user performance. Feedback was also solicited about the user experience, including user satisfaction and acceptance, through use of the Net Promoter Scale (NPS) survey and debrief interviews.

Results

A total of 37 participants (26 nurses and 11 patients) completed user testing. The majority of nurse and patient participants were able to complete most required tasks independently, demonstrating comprehension and retention of required Guardian and eTrAC system workflows. Tasks which required additional prompting by the facilitator, for some, were related to the use of system features that enable continuous transmission of patient vital signs (eg, pairing wireless sensors to the patient) and assigning remote patient monitoring protocols. NPS scores by user group (nurses using Guardian: mean 8.8, SD 0.89; nurses using eTrAC: mean 7.7, SD 1.4; patients using eTrAC: mean 9.2, SD 0.75), overall NPS scores, and participant debrief interviews indicated nurse and patient satisfaction and acceptance of the Guardian and eTrAC systems. Both user groups stressed the need for additional opportunities to practice in order to become comfortable and proficient in the use of these systems.

Conclusions

User testing indicated a high degree of user acceptance of Philips’ Guardian and eTrAC systems among nurses and patients. Key insights were provided that informed refinement of clinical workflow training and systems implementation. These results were used to optimize workflows before the launch of an international RCT of in-hospital RAM and virtual hospital-to-home care for patients undergoing cardiac and major vascular surgery.

Measuring next of kin satisfaction with hospital cancer care: Using a mixed-method approach as basis for improving quality and safety

AIM/S

To explore next of kin satisfaction with cancer care, map next of kin suggestions for involvement and combine this information to create a basis for improving quality and safety in hospitals.

DESIGN

Convergent parallel mixed-methods design applying the 20-item FAMCARE Scale survey instrument for quantitative measurement of satisfaction with care and with an open-ended question used for qualitative analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Responses from 238 next of kin (November 2016-November 2017).

METHODS

Exploratory factor analysis, regression analysis and qualitative content analysis were combined.

RESULTS

Both hospitals scored better in medical treatment (median, interquartile range: 1.5, 1.1-2.0), than in satisfaction with information and involvement of next of kin (1.9, 1.3-2.4), p < .001 (Wilcoxon signed ranks test). After adjusting for differences in demographical and clinical variables, the total FAMCARE scores were 13% higher (95% confidence interval: 1%-27%, Wald p = .029) at one of the hospitals. Qualitative findings support that the hospitals are not providing an equal offer to next of kin involvement in hospital cancer care that includes a proactive approach.

CONCLUSION

As a basis for quality and safety improvement, next of kin satisfaction and involvement in cancer care should be addressed in a two-sided perspective, balancing the next of kin's need for involvement in cancer treatment with the patient's perspective.

IMPACT

There is limited knowledge of next of kin satisfaction with hospital cancer care and how next of kin would like to be involved in this trajectory. Several aspects of satisfaction with cancer care can prompt change to improve service quality and safety (e.g. information, involvement, practical care), but this is an underused source of information. Next of kin are key in cancer care and our study demonstrates a potential large impact on future practical ways of improving cancer care service provision in an integrative perspective including next of kin.

Patient Engagement and Patient Safety: Are We Missing the Patient in the Center?

The global healthcare delivery paradigm shift calls for enhanced strategies to engage patients in delivering safer and high-quality healthcare. There still exists a gap area in a globally accepted measure for the person-centered care. Recent tri-institutional global quality reports from National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAESM), World Bank Group, and Lancet Global Health Commission attempted to report the patient engagement measures used globally. We aim to understand the variation in these globally reported patient-centered care measures and highlight the recent proactive strategies to enhance patient engagement to improve patient safety. I.

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.

Lessons Learned from a Systems Approach to Engaging Patients and Families in Patient Safety Transformation

BACKGROUND

Effective patient- and family-centered care requires a dedication to engaging patients and family members in health system redesign to improve the quality, safety, and experience of care. Provided here are lessons learned six years after establishing an infrastructure of patient and family advisory councils (PFACs) focused on improving health care quality and safety.

CONTEXT

A large regional health care system with multiple hospitals and ambulatory care delivery sites in the eastern United States adopted a systemwide approach to Patient and Family Advisory Councils on Quality and Safety (PFACQS^Ⓡ) in 2012.

APPROACH

This conceptual article describes the barriers and facilitators of adopting, implementing, and sustaining the PFACQS model across a large, geographically diffuse health system. Successful strategies that emerged include active board engagement, co-creation and mentorship by experienced patient advocates to support enhanced engagement by local PFACQS community members, and clear alignment with and line of sight on organizational quality and safety goals.

CONCLUSION

Implementing a robust network of PFACQS focused on improving quality and patient safety requires leadership commitment to transparency, as well as mutual respect and trust. Establishing clear guidelines, structures, and processes supports early adoption. Openness to continuous improvement and adaptations are important to program success and contribute to program sustainability.

Development and evaluation of an intervention based on the provision of patient feedback to improve patient safety in Spanish primary healthcare centres: study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Despite the enormous potential for adverse events in primary healthcare (PHC), the knowledge about how to improve patient safety in this context is still sparse. We describe the methods for the development and evaluation of an intervention targeted at PHC professionals to improve patient safety in Spanish PHC centres.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The intervention will consist in using the patient reported experiences and outcomes of safety in primary care (PREOS-PC) survey to gather patient-reported experiences and outcomes concerning the safety of the healthcare patients receive in their PHC centres, and feed that information back to the PHC professionals to help them identify opportunities for safer healthcare provision. The study will involve three stages. Stage 1 (developing the intervention) will involve: (i) qualitative study with 40 PHC providers to optimise the acceptability and perceived utility of the proposed intervention; (ii) Spanish translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the PREOS-PC survey; (iii) developing the intervention components; and (iv) developing an online tool to electronically administrate PREOS-PC and automatically generate feedback reports to PHC centres. Stage 2 (piloting the intervention) will involve a 3-month feasibility (one group pre-post) study in 10 PHC centres (500 patients, 260 providers). Stage 3 (evaluating the intervention) will involve: (i) a 12-month, two-arm, two-level cluster randomised controlled trial (1248 PHC professionals within 48 PHC centres; with randomisation at the centre level in a 1:1 ratio) to evaluate the impact of the intervention on patient safety culture (primary outcome), patient-reported safety experiences and outcomes (using the PREOS-PC survey), and avoidable hospitalisations; (ii) qualitative study with 20 PHC providers to evaluate the acceptability and perceived utility of the intervention and identify implementation barriers.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Balearic Islands (CEI IB: 3686/18) with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments. The results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03837912; pre-results.