1
|
Sokol-Hessner L, Dechen T, Folcarelli P, McGaffigan P, Stevens JP, Thomas EJ, Bell S. Associations Between Organizational Communication and Patients' Experience of Prolonged Emotional Impact Following Medical Errors. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2024; 50:620-629. [PMID: 38565471 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2024.03.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2023] [Revised: 02/28/2024] [Accepted: 03/04/2024] [Indexed: 04/04/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The emotional impact of medical errors on patients may be long-lasting. Factors associated with prolonged emotional impacts are poorly understood. METHODS The authors conducted a subanalysis of a 2017 survey (response rate 36.8% [2,536/6,891]) of US adults to assess emotional impact of medical error. Patients reporting a medical error were included if the error occurred ≥ 1 year prior. Duration of emotional impact was categorized into no/short-term impact (impact lasting < 1 month), prolonged impact (> 1 month), and especially prolonged impact (> 1 year). Based on their reported experience with communication about the error, patients' experience was categorized as consistent with national disclosure guidelines, contrary to guidelines, mixed, or neither. Multinomial regression was used to examine associations between patient factors, event characteristics, and organizational communication with prolonged emotional impact (> 1 month, > 1 year). RESULTS Of all survey respondents, 17.8% (451/2,536) reported an error occurring ≥ 1 year prior. Of these, 51.2% (231/451) reported prolonged/especially prolonged emotional impact (30.8% prolonged, 20.4% especially prolonged). Factors associated with prolonged emotional impact included female gender (adjusted odds ratio 2.1 [95% confidence interval 1.5-2.9]); low socioeconomic status (SES; 1.7 [1.1-2.7]); physical impact (7.3 [4.3-12.3]); no organizational disclosure and no patient/family error reporting (1.5 [1.03-2.3]); communication contrary to guidelines (4.0 [2.1-7.5]); and mixed communication (2.2 [1.3-3.7]). The same factors were significantly associated with especially prolonged emotional impact (female, 1.7 [1.2-2.5]; low SES, 2.2 [1.3-3.6]; physical impact, 6.8 [3.8-12.5]; no disclosure/reporting, 1.9 [1.2-3.2]; communication contrary to guidelines, 4.6 [2.2-9.4]; mixed communication, 2.1 [1.1-3.9]). CONCLUSION Prolonged emotional impact affected more than half of Americans self-reporting a medical error. Organizational failure to communicate according to disclosure guidelines after patient-perceived errors may exacerbate harm, particularly for patients at risk of health care disparities.
Collapse
|
2
|
McLennan S, Briel M. A call for error management in academic clinical research. J Clin Epidemiol 2023; 154:208-211. [PMID: 36481252 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.11.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2022] [Revised: 11/28/2022] [Accepted: 11/30/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Stuart McLennan
- Institute of History and Ethics in Medicine, TUM School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Matthias Briel
- CLEAR Methods Center, Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Clinical Research, University of Basel and University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Biovigilância e notificação de eventos adversos na doação e transplante de órgãos: revisão sistemática. ACTA PAUL ENFERM 2023. [DOI: 10.37689/acta-ape/2023ar00101] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
|
4
|
Long JC, Sarkies MN, Francis Auton E, Nguyen HM, Pomare C, Hardwick R, Braithwaite J. Conceptualising contexts, mechanisms and outcomes for implementing large-scale, multisite hospital improvement initiatives: a realist synthesis. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e058158. [PMID: 35589340 PMCID: PMC9126051 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058158] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2021] [Accepted: 04/26/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
DESIGN Realist synthesis. STUDY BACKGROUND Large-scale hospital improvement initiatives can standardise healthcare across multiple sites but results are contingent on the implementation strategies that complement them. The benefits of these implemented interventions are rarely able to be replicated in different contexts. Realist studies explore this phenomenon in depth by identifying underlying context-mechanism-outcome interactions. OBJECTIVES To review implementation strategies used in large-scale hospital initiatives and hypothesise initial programme theories for how they worked across different contexts. METHODS An iterative, four-step process was applied. Step 1 explored the concepts inherent in large-scale interventions using database searches and snowballing. Step 2 identified strategies used in their implementation. Step 3 identified potential initial programme theories that may explain strategies' mechanisms. Step 4 focused on one strategy-theory pairing to develop and test context-mechanism-outcome hypotheses. Data was drawn from searches (March-May 2020) of MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed and CINAHL, snowballed from key papers, implementation support websites and the expertise of the research team and experts. INCLUSION CRITERIA reported implementation of a large-scale, multisite hospital intervention. RAMESES reporting standards were followed. RESULTS Concepts were identified from 51 of 381 articles. Large-scale hospital interventions were characterised by a top-down approach, external and internal support and use of evidence-based interventions. We found 302 reports of 28 different implementation strategies from 31 reviews (from a total of 585). Formal theories proposed for the implementation strategies included Diffusion of Innovation, and Organisational Readiness Theory. Twenty-three context-mechanism-outcome statements for implementation strategies associated with planning and assessment activities were proposed. Evidence from the published literature supported the hypothesised programme theories and were consistent with Organisational Readiness Theory's tenets. CONCLUSION This paper adds to the literature exploring why large-scale hospital interventions are not always successfully implemented and suggests 24 causative mechanisms and contextual factors that may drive outcomes in the planning and assessment stage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Janet C Long
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Mitchell N Sarkies
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Emilie Francis Auton
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Hoa Mi Nguyen
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Chiara Pomare
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - Jeffrey Braithwaite
- Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Dijkstra RI, Roodbeen RTJ, Bouwman RJR, Pemberton A, Friele R. Patients at the centre after a health care incident: A scoping review of hospital strategies targeting communication and nonmaterial restoration. Health Expect 2021; 25:264-275. [PMID: 34931415 PMCID: PMC8849248 DOI: 10.1111/hex.13376] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2020] [Revised: 10/04/2021] [Accepted: 10/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to provide an overview of the strategies adopted by hospitals that target effective communication and nonmaterial restoration (i.e., without a financial or material focus) after health care incidents, and to formulate elements in hospital strategies that patients consider essential by analysing how patients have evaluated these strategies. BACKGROUND In the aftermath of a health care incident, hospitals are tasked with responding to the patients' material and nonmaterial needs, mainly restoration and communication. Currently, an overview of these strategies is lacking. In particular, a gap exists concerning how patients evaluate these strategies. SEARCH STRATEGY AND INCLUSION CRITERIA To identify studies in this scoping review, and following the methodological framework set out by Arksey and O'Malley, seven subject-relevant electronic databases were used (PubMed, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO and Psychology & Behavioral Sciences Collection). Reference lists of included studies were also checked for relevant studies. Studies were included if published in English, after 2000 and as peer-reviewed articles. MAIN RESULTS AND SYNTHESIS The search yielded 13,989 hits. The review has a final inclusion of 16 studies. The inclusion led to an analysis of five different hospital strategies: open disclosure processes, communication-and-resolution programmes, complaints procedures, patients-as-partners in learning from health care incidents and subsequent disclosure, and mediation. The analysis showed three main domains that patients considered essential: interpersonal communication, organisation around disclosure and support and desired outcomes. PATIENT CONTRIBUTION This scoping review specifically takes the patient perspective in its methodological design and analysis. Studies were included if they contained an evaluation by patients, and the included studies were analysed on the essential elements for patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel I Dijkstra
- Department of Criminal Law, Tilburg Law School, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.,Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ruud T J Roodbeen
- Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Tranzo Scientific Center for Care and Wellbeing, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - Renée J R Bouwman
- Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Antony Pemberton
- Department of Criminal Law, Tilburg Law School, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.,Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Tranzo Scientific Center for Care and Wellbeing, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.,Leuven Institute of Criminology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Roland Friele
- Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Tranzo Scientific Center for Care and Wellbeing, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Jelalian E, Evans W, Darling KE, Seifer R, Vivier P, Goldberg J, Wright C, Tanskey L, Warnick J, Hayes J, Shepard D, Tuttle H, Elwy AR. Protocol for the Rhode Island CORD 3.0 Study: Adapting, Testing, and Packaging the JOIN for ME Family-Based Childhood Obesity Program in Low-Income Communities. Child Obes 2021; 17:S11-S21. [PMID: 34569839 PMCID: PMC8575054 DOI: 10.1089/chi.2021.0179] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Background: Overweight and obesity in children is a public health crisis in the United States. Although evidence-based interventions have been developed, such programs are difficult to access. Dissemination of evidence-based pediatric weight management interventions (PWMIs) to families from diverse low-income communities is the primary objective of the CDC Childhood Obesity Research Demonstration (CORD) projects. Methods: The goal of the Rhode Island CORD 3.0 project is to adapt the evidence-based PWMI, JOIN for ME, for delivery among diverse families from low-income backgrounds and to test it in a hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial design in which the aims are to examine implementation and patient-centered outcomes. Children between the ages of 6 and 12 years with BMI ≥85th percentile and a caregiver will be recruited through two settings, a federally qualified health center, which serves as a patient-centered medical home, or low-income housing. Dyads will receive a remotely delivered group-based intervention that is 10 months in duration and includes 16 weekly sessions, followed by 4 biweekly and 4 monthly meetings. Assessments of child and caregiver weight status and child health-related quality of life will be conducted at baseline, and at 4 and 10 months after the start of intervention. Implementation outcomes assessing intervention acceptability, adoption, feasibility, fidelity, and penetration/reach will be collected to inform subsequent dissemination. Conclusions: If the adapted version of the JOIN for ME intervention can be successfully implemented and is shown to be effective, this project will provide a model for a scalable PWMI for families from low-income backgrounds. ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT04647760.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elissa Jelalian
- Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.,The Weight Control and Diabetes Research Center, The Miriam Hospital, Providence, RI, USA.,Address correspondence to: Elissa Jelalian, PhD, Weight Control and Diabetes Research Center, 196 Richmond Street, Providence, RI 02903, USA.
| | - Whitney Evans
- Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.,The Weight Control and Diabetes Research Center, The Miriam Hospital, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Katherine E. Darling
- Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.,The Weight Control and Diabetes Research Center, The Miriam Hospital, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Ronald Seifer
- Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Patrick Vivier
- School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Jeanne Goldberg
- Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University, Medford, MA, USA
| | - Catherine Wright
- Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University, Medford, MA, USA
| | | | - Jennifer Warnick
- Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Jacqueline Hayes
- Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.,The Weight Control and Diabetes Research Center, The Miriam Hospital, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Donald Shepard
- Heller School of Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, USA
| | | | - A. Rani Elwy
- Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.,Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Elwy AR, Maguire EM, McCullough M, George J, Bokhour BG, Durfee JM, Martinello RA, Wagner TH, Asch SM, Gifford AL, Gallagher TH, Walker Y, Sharpe VA, Geppert C, Holodniy M, West G. From implementation to sustainment: A large-scale adverse event disclosure support program generated through embedded research in the Veterans Health Administration. HEALTHCARE (AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS) 2021; 8 Suppl 1:100496. [PMID: 34175102 PMCID: PMC11365187 DOI: 10.1016/j.hjdsi.2020.100496] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2019] [Revised: 10/25/2020] [Accepted: 11/03/2020] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
In 2008, the Veterans Health Administration published a groundbreaking policy on disclosing large-scale adverse events to patients in order to promote transparent communication in cases where harm may not be obvious or even certain. Without embedded research, the evidence on whether or not implementation of this policy was generating more harm than good among Veteran patients was unknown. Through an embedded research-operations partnership, we conducted four research projects that led to the development of an evidence-based large-scale disclosure toolkit and disclosure support program, and its implementation across VA healthcare. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we identified specific activities corresponding to planning, engaging, executing, reflecting and evaluating phases in the process of implementation. These activities included planning with operational leaders to establish a shared research agenda; engaging with stakeholders to discuss early results, establishing buy-in of our efforts and receiving feedback; joining existing operational teams to execute the toolkit implementation; partnering with clinical operations to evaluate the toolkit during real-time disclosures; and redesigning the toolkit to meet stakeholders' needs. Critical lessons learned for implementation success included a need for stakeholder collaboration and engagement, an organizational culture involving a strong belief in evidence, a willingness to embed researchers in clinical operation activities, allowing for testing and evaluation of innovative practices, and researchers open to constructive feedback. At the conclusion of the research, VA operations worked with the researchers to continue to support efforts to spread, scale-up and sustain toolkit use across the VA healthcare system, with the final goal to establish long-term sustainability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Rani Elwy
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, 01730, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, RI, 02912, USA; Department of Health Law, Policy, and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
| | - Elizabeth M Maguire
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, 01730, USA
| | - Megan McCullough
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, 01730, USA
| | - Judy George
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Boston Healthcare System, Jamaica Plain, MA, 02130, USA
| | - Barbara G Bokhour
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, 01730, USA; Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, 01605, USA
| | - Janet M Durfee
- Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Office of Patient Care Services, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Richard A Martinello
- Departments of Medicine (Infectious Diseases) and Pediatrics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA; Yale New Haven Hospital and Yale New Haven Health, Quality and Safety, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA
| | - Todd H Wagner
- Center for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, 94025, USA; Department of Surgery, Stanford University Medical School, Palo Alto, CA, 94305, USA
| | - Steven M Asch
- Center for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, 94025, USA; Department of Primary Care and Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, 94305, USA
| | - Allen L Gifford
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Boston Healthcare System, Jamaica Plain, MA, 02130, USA; Section of General Internal Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, 02118, USA
| | - Thomas H Gallagher
- Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98104, USA
| | - Yuri Walker
- Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Office of Quality and Safety, Risk Management Service, Washington, DC. 20420, USA
| | - Virginia A Sharpe
- Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, National Center for Ethics in Healthcare, Office of Ethics Policy, Washington, DC. 20420, USA
| | - Cynthia Geppert
- Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, National Center for Ethics in Healthcare, Office of Ethics Policy, Washington, DC. 20420, USA
| | - Mark Holodniy
- Public Health Surveillance & Research Program and Public Health Reference Laboratory, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA; Department of Medicine (Infectious Diseases), Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, 94305, USA
| | - Gavin West
- VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake, UT, 84148, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Wagner TH, Dopp AR, Gold HT. Estimating Downstream Budget Impacts in Implementation Research. Med Decis Making 2020; 40:968-977. [PMID: 32951506 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x20954387] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
Health care decision makers often request information showing how a new treatment or intervention will affect their budget (i.e., a budget impact analysis; BIA). In this article, we present key topics for considering how to measure downstream health care costs, a key component of the BIA, when implementing an evidence-based program designed to reduce a quality gap. Tracking health care utilization can be done with administrative or self-reported data, but estimating costs for these utilization data raises 2 issues that are often overlooked in implementation science. The first issue has to do with applicability: are the cost estimates applicable to the health care system that is implementing the quality improvement program? We often use national cost estimates or average payments, without considering whether these cost estimates are appropriate. Second, we need to determine the decision maker's time horizon to identify the costs that vary in that time horizon. If the BIA takes a short-term time horizon, then we should focus on costs that vary in the short run and exclude costs that are fixed over this time. BIA is an increasingly popular tool for health care decision makers interested in understanding the financial effect of implementing an evidence-based program. Without careful consideration of some key conceptual issues, we run the risk of misleading decision makers when presenting results from implementation studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Todd H Wagner
- Health Economics Resource Center, US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Palo Alto Health Care System, Menlo Park, CA, USA.,Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | | | - Heather T Gold
- Departments of Population Health and Orthopedic Surgery, New York University (NYU) Langone Health, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
George J, Elwy AR, Charns MP, Maguire EM, Baker E, Burgess JF, Meterko M. Exploring the Association Between Organizational Culture and Large-Scale Adverse Events: Evidence from the Veterans Health Administration. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2020; 46:270-281. [PMID: 32238298 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2020.02.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/14/2019] [Revised: 02/03/2020] [Accepted: 02/04/2020] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Large-scale adverse events (LSAEs) involve unsafe clinical practices stemming from system issues that may affect multiple patients. Although literature suggests a supportive organizational culture may protect against system-related adverse events, no study has explored such a relationship within the context of LSAEs. This study aimed to identify whether staff perceptions of organizational culture were associated with LSAE incidence. METHODS The team conducted an exploratory analysis using the 2008-2010 data from the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) All Employee Survey (AES). LSAE incidence was the outcome variable in two facilities where similar infection control practice issues occurred, leading to LSAEs. For comparison, four facilities where LSAEs had not occurred were selected, matched on VA-assigned facility complexity and geography. The AES explanatory factors included workgroup-level (civility, employee engagement, leadership, psychological safety, resources, rewards) and hospital-level Likert-type scales for four cultural factors (group, rational, entrepreneurial, bureaucratic). Bivariate analyses and logistic regressions were performed, with individual staff as the unit of analysis from the anonymous AES data. RESULTS Responses from 209 AES participants across the six facilities in the sample indicated that the four comparison facilities had significantly higher mean scores compared to the two LSAE facilities for 9 of 10 explanatory factors. The adjusted analyses identified that employee engagement significantly predicted LSAE incidence (odds ratio = 0.58, 95% confidence interval = 0.37-0.90). CONCLUSION Staff at the two exposure facilities in this study described their organizational culture to be less supportive. Lower scores in employee engagement may be a contributing factor for LSAEs.
Collapse
|
10
|
McLennan S, Moore J. New Zealand District Health Boards' Open Disclosure Policies: A Qualitative Review. JOURNAL OF BIOETHICAL INQUIRY 2019; 16:35-44. [PMID: 30617731 DOI: 10.1007/s11673-018-9894-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2018] [Accepted: 12/13/2018] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND New Zealand health and disability providers are expected to have local open disclosure policies in place, however, empirical analysis of these policies has not been undertaken. AIM This study aims to (1) examine the scope and content of open disclosure policies in New Zealand (2) compare open disclosure policies in New Zealand, and (3) provide baseline results for future research. METHODS Open disclosure policies were requested from all twenty New Zealand District Health Boards in June 2016. A total of twenty-one policies were received, with nineteen policies included in the review. The data were analysed using conventional content analysis. Areas of identified guidance were categorised categorized under the headings: 1) identification of an adverse event, 2) actions before disclosure, 3) disclosure of harm, and 4) actions after disclosure. RESULTS A total of forty-six distinct areas of guidance could be categorized under the different phases of the open disclosure life-cycle. CONCLUSION This review has identified significant unwarranted heterogeneity and important gaps in open disclosure documents in New Zealand which urgently needs to be addressed. Open disclosure policies which are both flexible and specific should enhance the likelihood that injured patients' needs will be met.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stuart McLennan
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland.
| | - Jennifer Moore
- Faculty of Law, University of New South Wales, The Law Building, Union Road, UNSW Kensington Campus, Sydney, New South Wales, 2052, Australia
| |
Collapse
|