The World Federation of Chiropractic Global Patient Safety Task Force: a call to action

BACKGROUND

The Global Patient Safety Action Plan, an initiative of the World Health Organization (WHO), draws attention to patient safety as being an issue of utmost importance in healthcare. In response, the World Federation of Chiropractic (WFC) has established a Global Patient Safety Task Force to advance a patient safety culture across all facets of the chiropractic profession. This commentary aims to introduce principles and call upon the chiropractic profession to actively engage with the Global Patient Safety Action Plan beginning immediately and over the coming decade.

MAIN TEXT

This commentary addresses why the chiropractic profession should pay attention to the WHO Global Patient Safety Action Plan, and what actions the chiropractic profession should take to advance these objectives. Each strategic objective identified by WHO serves as a focal point for reflection and action. Objective 1 emphasizes the need to view each clinical interaction as a chance to improve patient safety through learning. Objective 2 urges the implementation of frameworks that dismantle systemic obstacles, minimizing human errors and strengthening patient safety procedures. Objective 3 supports the optimization of clinical process safety. Objective 4 recognizes the need for patient and family engagement. Objective 5 describes the need for integrated patient safety competencies in training programs. Objective 6 explains the need for foundational data infrastructure, ecosystem, and culture. Objective 7 emphasizes that patient safety is optimized when healthcare professionals cultivate synergy and partnerships.

CONCLUSIONS

The WFC Global Patient Safety Task Force provides a structured framework for aligning essential considerations for patient safety in chiropractic care with WHO strategic objectives. Embracing the prescribed action steps offers a roadmap for the chiropractic profession to nurture an inclusive and dedicated culture, placing patient safety at its core. This commentary advocates for a concerted effort within the chiropractic community to commit to and implement these principles for the collective advancement of patient safety.

Racial and ethnic harm in patient care is a patient safety issue

Health equity and antiracism can contribute to enhanced patient safety in healthcare settings. The Oath of the Pharmacist states, "I will promote inclusion, embrace diversity, and advocate for justice to advance health equity." Part of this commitment means upholding these principles in patient care settings. Racial and ethnic harm negatively impact patient safety. Racial and ethnic harm are reviewed in the context of social learning theory, critical race theory, and medical and scientific racism. Pharmacists and healthcare systems must actively prevent and mitigate racial and ethnic harm to patients from personal and organizational levels to create a culture of safety. Part of this strategy involves acknowledging when you have contributed to patient harm, issuing a genuine apology, and offering to mend or re-establish trust between racially and ethnically minoritized patients and the pharmacist or the health system to contribute to patient safety. These strategies may help create a culturally safe space for racially and ethnically marginalized patients in the healthcare system.

Patients' perspectives on quality and patient safety failures: lessons learned from an inquiry into transvaginal mesh in Australia

BACKGROUND

Transvaginal mesh (TVM) surgeries emerged as an innovative treatment for stress urine incontinency and/or pelvic organ prolapse in 1996. Years after rapid adoption of these surgeries into practice, they are a key example of worldwide failure of healthcare quality and patient safety. The prevalence of TVM-associated harms eventually prompted action globally, including an Australian Commonwealth Government Senate Inquiry in 2017.

METHOD

We analysed 425 submissions made by women (n = 417) and their advocates (n = 8) to the Australian Senate Inquiry, and documents from 5 public hearings, using deductive and inductive coding, categorisation and thematic analysis informed by three 'linked dilemmas' from healthcare quality and safety theory. We focused on women's accounts of: a) how harms arose from TVM procedures, and b) micro, meso and macro factors that contributed to their experience. Our aim was to explain, from a patient perspective, how these harms persisted in Australian healthcare, and to identify mechanisms at micro, meso and macro levels explaining quality and safety system failure.

RESULTS

Our findings suggest three mechanisms explaining quality and safety failure: 1. Individual clinicians could ignore cases of TVM injury or define them as 'non-preventable'; 2. Women could not go beyond their treating clinicians to participate in defining and governing quality and safety; and. 3. Health services set thresholds for concern based on proportion of cases harmed, not absolute number or severity of harms.

CONCLUSION

We argue that privileging clinical perspectives over patient perspectives in evaluating TVM outcomes allowed micro-level actors to dismiss women's lived experience, such that women's accounts of harms had insufficient or no weight at meso and macro levels. Establishing system-wide expectations regarding responsiveness to patients, and communication of patient reported outcomes in evaluation of healthcare delivery, may help prevent similar failures.

Identifying the patient harms to include in an in silico clinical trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Clinical trials represent a crucial step in the development and approval of medical devices. These trials involve evaluating the safety and efficacy of the device in a controlled setting with human subjects. However, traditional clinical trials can be expensive, time-consuming, and ethically challenging. Augmenting clinical trials with data from computer simulations, so called in silico clinical trials (ISCT), has the potential to address these challenges while satisfying regulatory requirements. However, determination of the patient harms in scope of an ISCT is necessary to ensure all harms are sufficiently addressed while maximizing the utility of the ISCT. This topic is currently lacking guidance. The objective of this work is to propose a general method to determine which patient harms should be included in an ISCT for a regulatory submission.

METHODS

The proposed method considers the risk associated with the harm, the impact of the device on the likelihood of occurrence of the harm and the technical feasibility of evaluating the harm via ISCT. Consideration of the risk associated with the harm provides maximum clinical impact of the ISCT, in terms of focusing on those failure modes which are most relevant to the patient population. Consideration of the impact of the device on a particular harm, and the technical feasibility of modeling a particular harm supports that the technical effort is devoted to a problem that (1) is relevant to the device in question, and (2) can be solved with contemporary modeling techniques.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

As a case study, the proposed method is applied to a total shoulder replacement humeral system. With this framework, it is hoped that a consistent approach to scoping an ISCT can be adopted, supporting investment in ISCT by the industry, enabling consistent review of the ISCT approach across device disciplines by regulators, and providing maximum impact of modeling technologies in support of devices to improve patient outcomes.

Methods for determining clinical utility

Measuring the clinical utility of a diagnostic test involves evaluating its impact on patient outcomes, clinical decision-making, and healthcare resource utilization. Determining clinical utility requires accessing patient medical history and outcomes data. These studies involve enrolling patients undergoing diagnostic tests and tracking their clinical outcomes. Researchers can determine the test's clinical utility by comparing the outcomes of patients who receive the diagnostic test to those who do not. These outcomes include benefits and harm. The highest level of evidence to support clinical utility determinations may be obtained from clinical trials. However, clinical laboratories are often not involved in clinical trials, and laboratory specialists may not be experienced in conducting such trials. Many established laboratory tests have never had clinical utility determined. Prospective studies assessing a diagnostic test's impact on clinical outcomes may require long-term patient monitoring, which is problematic. This paper presents methods that may be used to assess clinical utility.

Challenges in Pharmacovigilance: Variability in the Criteria for Determining Drug-Associated Acute Kidney Injury in Retrospective, Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Drug-associated acute kidney injury (D-AKI) accounts for 19-26% of acute kidney injury (AKI) events in hospitalized patients and results in outcomes similar to patients with AKI from other etiologies. Diagnosing D-AKI is complex and various criteria have been used.

SUMMARY

To highlight the variability in D-AKI determination, a review was conducted between January 2017 and December 2022 using PubMed. Search terms included adaptations of "drug associated kidney injury" to identify a sampling of literature discussing definitions and criteria for D-AKI evaluation. The search yielded 291 articles that were uploaded to Rayyan, a software tool used to screen and select studies. Retrospective, observational electronic health record (EHR) studies conducted in hospitalized patients were included. The final sample contained 16 studies for data extraction, representing mostly adult populations (n = 13, 81.3%) in noncritical or unspecified inpatient settings (n = 12, 75%). Nine studies (56.3%) utilized the recommended Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcome guidelines (KDIGO) criteria to define AKI. Baseline creatinine or laboratory criteria for kidney function were provided in 10 studies (62.5%). Eleven studies (68.8%) established a temporal sequence assessment linking nephrotoxin drug exposure to an AKI event, but these criteria were inconsistent among studies using time frames as soon as 3 months prior to AKI.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the substantial variability in D-AKI criteria in select studies. Minimum expectations about what should be reported and criteria for the elements reported are needed to assure transparency, consistency, and standardization of pharmacovigilance strategies.

Interprofessional In Situ Simulation to Identify Latent Safety Threats for Quality Improvement: A Single-Center Protocol Report

In situ simulation has frequently been used to improve team performance and provide an opportunity for the practice of critical skills and identify latent safety threats, which are undetected risks that may lead to adverse outcomes. However, the use of known quality improvement tools to prioritize and mitigate these safety threats is an area requiring further study. Over the course of 9 in situ simulations of a pediatric shock case, postcase debriefs were held to identify latent safety threats in an emergency department and a mixed pediatric and adult inpatient unit. Latent safety threats identified included structure-related threats such as inability to locate critical equipment, knowledge-based threats relating to rapid intravenous fluid administration, and communication-based threats such as lack of role designation. Identification of latent safety threats in the health care environment may assist clinician leaders in mitigating risk of patient harm. The protocol described may be adopted and applied to other critical event simulations, with structured debriefing used as a tool to identify and mitigate threats before they affect the patient.

Classifying and Disclosing Medical Errors

Medical errors are an unfortunate but common occurrence in health care. It is important to understand what medical errors are and what types of harm can occur to patients. Along with recognition of the error, disclosure is an equally important part of the process. Clinicians should provide open and honest discussion about the events that occurred to patients along with feedback to institutions on ways to prevent such errors in the future.

A diagnosis of prediabetes when combined with lifestyle advice and support is considered helpful rather than a negative label by a demographically diverse group: A qualitative study

AIMS

The aim of this study was to explore the experience and perceptions of a diagnosis of prediabetes among a demographically diverse sample of New Zealanders who had, and had not, regressed to normoglycaemia following participation in a primary care nurse-delivered intervention for 6 months. The sample included Indigenous Māori who have high rates of diabetes and associated co-morbidities.

METHODS

A purposefully selected sample of 58 people with prediabetes and BMI >25 kg/m², stratified by male/female, Māori/non-Māori, and those who had/had not regressed to normoglycaemia, after completing 6-months of a prediabetes intervention were interviewed. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were analysed by thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Most participants recalled being shocked when told they had prediabetes, but they did not perceive the diagnosis to be a label in a negative sense, and some, described the diagnosis as helpful. Participants appreciated knowing that prediabetes could be reversed, and the opportunity to be able to take supported action and make lifestyle changes through the nurse-delivered prediabetes lifestyle intervention. Participants' clear preference was to take control and make dietary changes, not to take Metformin.

CONCLUSIONS

Prediabetes was not considered a negative label, but an opportunity, when coupled with a primary care nurse-delivered dietary intervention.

Drug-related emergency department visits in older patients: an applicability and reliability study of an existing assessment tool

BACKGROUND

AT-HARM10 is a research tool to identify possible drug-related hospital admissions. It is unclear whether the tool can be applied to emergency department visits as well.

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the applicability and reliability to identify drug-related emergency department visits in older patients with AT-HARM10.

METHOD

A random sample of 400 patients aged 65 years or older from a clinical trial in four Swedish hospitals was selected. All patients' emergency department visits within 12 months after discharge were assessed with AT-HARM10. The main outcome measures were the percentage of successfully assessed visits for applicability and the interrater reliability (Cohen's kappa).

RESULTS

Of the initial sample (n = 400), 113 patients [median age (interquartile range): 81 (76-88) years] had at least one emergency department visit within 12 months. The patients had in total 184 visits, of which 179 (97%) were successfully assessed. Fifty-three visits (29%) were possibly drug-related. The Cohen's kappa value was 0.70 (substantial).

CONCLUSION

It seems applicable and reliable to identify possible drug-related emergency department visits in addition to hospital admissions in older patients with AT-HARM10. As a consequence, the tool has been updated to support its novel use in clinical research.

Diagnostic Error in the Critically Ill: A Hidden Epidemic?

Epidemiologic studies of diagnostic error in the intensive care unit (ICU) consist mostly of descriptive autopsy series. In these studies, rates of diagnostic errors are approximately 5% to 10%. Recently validated methods for retrospectively measuring error have expanded our understanding of the scope of the problem. These alternative measurement strategies have yielded similar estimates for the frequency of diagnostic error in the ICU. Although there is a fair understanding of the frequency of errors, further research is needed to better define the risk factors for diagnostic error in the ICU.

Compensated Patient Injuries in the Treatment of Abdominal Aortic and Iliac Artery Aneurysms in Finland: A Nationwide Patient Insurance Registry Study

OBJECTIVES

Patient injury claims data and insurance records provide detailed information on patient injuries. This study aimed to identify the errors and adverse events that led to patient injuries in vascular surgery for the treatments of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) and iliac artery aneurysms (IAA) in Finland. The study also assessed the severity and preventability of the injuries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of Finnish Patient Insurance Centre's insurance charts of compensated patient injuries in the treatment of AAA and IAA. Records of all compensated patient injury claims involving AAA and IAA between 2004 and 2017 inclusive were reviewed. Contributing factors to injury were identified and classified. The injuries were assessed for their preventability by using the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist correctly. The degree of harm was graded by Clavien-Dindo classification.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patient injury incidents were identified in the treatment of 23 patients. Typical injuries involved delays in diagnosis or treatment, errors in surgical technique or injuries to adjacent anatomic organs. Three (13.0%) patients died due to patient injury. Two deaths were caused by delays in diagnosis of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA) and the third death was due to missed diagnosis of post-operative myocardial infarction. Retained foreign material caused injuries to two (8.7%) patients. One (4.3%) patient had a severe postoperative infection. Three (13.0%) patients experienced an injury to an adjacent organ. One patient had a bilateral and another a unilateral above-the-knee amputation due to patient injury. Three injuries were considered preventable. Most harms were grade IIIb Clavien-Dindo classification in which injured patients required a surgical intervention under general anesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

Compensated patient injuries involving the treatment of AAA and IAA are rare, but are often serious. Injuries were identified during all stages of care. Most injuries involved open surgical procedures.

Medication-related adverse events in health care-what have we learned? A narrative overview of the current knowledge

Purpose

Although medication-related adverse events (MRAEs) in health care are vastly studied, high heterogeneity in study results complicates the interpretations of the current situation. The main objective of this study was to form an up-to-date overview of the current knowledge of the prevalence, risk factors, and surveillance of MRAEs in health care.

Methods

Electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched with applicable search terms to collect information on medication-related adverse events. In order to obtain an up-to-date view of MRAEs, only studies published after 2000 were accepted.

Results

The prevalence rates of different MRAEs vary greatly between individual studies and meta-analyses. Study setting, patient population, and detection methods play an important role in determining detection rates, which should be regarded while interpreting the results. Medication-related adverse events are more common in elderly patients and patients with lowered liver or kidney function, polypharmacy, and a large number of additional comorbidities. However, the risk of MRAEs is also significantly increased by the use of high-risk medicines but also in certain care situations. Preventing MRAEs is important as it will decrease patient mortality and morbidity but also reduce costs and functional challenges related to them.

Conclusions

Medication-related adverse events are highly common and have both immediate and long-term effects to patients and healthcare systems worldwide. Conclusive solutions for prevention of all medication-related harm are impossible to create. In the future, however, the development of efficient real-time detection methods can provide significant improvements for event prevention and forecasting.

Communication of bad news in relation with surgery or anesthesia: An interdisciplinary simulation training program

INTRODUCTION

Disclosure of damage related to care is a difficult area of communication due to the physician's feeling of guilt or the fear of liability. The aim of this study was to develop, and to evaluate the impact of an inter-disciplinary simulation program on communication of damage related to care.

METHODS

Residents in gynecology/obstetrics and anesthesiology participated in role-playing scenarios of communication of damage related to care. We assessed verbal, non-verbal communication skills and inter-disciplinary relations with a modified SPIKES protocol and with a video analysis with predefined indicators. We evaluated long-term impact of the training at 3-6 months with combining self-assessment and a video analysis on retained knowledge.

RESULTS

We included 80 residents in 15 sessions of simulation. Satisfaction regarding the simulation training was high (9.1/10 [8.9-9.3]). The part of the SPIKES protocol "setting up the interview" was the more difficult to apply. Empathic attitude was adopted 80 % of the time in the two scenarios with a life-threatening complication but was less common in the anesthetic one (broken tooth). The residents found interdisciplinary disclosure helpful due to support from the other resident. Immediately after the session, residents reported an important improvement in communication skills and that the session would significantly change their practice. At 3-6 months, reports were still largely positive but less than on immediate evaluation.

CONCLUSION

Residents did not master the most important communication skills. The interdisciplinary method to breaking bad news was felt useful.

Consequences to patients, clinicians, and manufacturers when very serious adverse drug reactions are identified (1997-2019): A qualitative analysis from the Southern Network on Adverse Reactions (SONAR)

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug/device reactions (ADRs) can result in severe patient harm. We define very serious ADRs as being associated with severe toxicity, as measured on the Common Toxicity Criteria Adverse Events (CTCAE)) scale, following use of drugs or devices with large sales, large financial settlements, and large numbers of injured persons. We report on impacts on patients, clinicians, and manufacturers following very serious ADR reporting.

METHODS

We reviewed clinician identified very serious ADRs published between 1997 and 2019. Drugs and devices associated with reports of very serious ADRs were identified. Included drugs or devices had market removal discussed at Food and Drug Advisory (FDA) Advisory Committee meetings, were published by clinicians, had sales > $1 billion, were associated with CTCAE Grade 4 or 5 toxicity effects, and had either >$1 billion in settlements or >1,000 injured patients. Data sources included journals, Congressional transcripts, and news reports. We reviewed data on: 1) timing of ADR reports, Boxed warnings, and product withdrawals, and 2) patient, clinician, and manufacturer impacts. Binomial analysis was used to compare sales pre- and post-FDA Advisory Committee meetings.

FINDINGS

Twenty very serious ADRs involved fifteen drugs and one device. Legal settlements totaled $38.4 billion for 753,900 injured persons. Eleven of 18 clinicians (61%) reported harms, including verbal threats from manufacturer (five) and loss of a faculty position (one). Annual sales decreased 94% from $29.1 billion pre-FDA meeting to $4.9 billion afterwards (p<0.0018). Manufacturers of four drugs paid $1.7 billion total in criminal fines for failing to inform the FDA and physicians about very serious ADRs. Following FDA approval, the median time to ADR reporting was 7.5 years (Interquartile range 3,13 years). Twelve drugs received Box warnings and one drug received a warning (median, 7.5 years following ADR reporting (IQR 5,11 years). Six drugs and 1 device were withdrawn from marketing (median, 5 years after ADR reporting (IQR 4,6 years)).

INTERPRETATION

Because very serious ADRs impacts are so large, policy makers should consider developing independently funded pharmacovigilance centers of excellence to assist with clinician investigations.

FUNDING

This work received support from the National Cancer Institute (1R01 CA102713 (CLB), https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/what-we-do/nih-almanac/national-cancer-institute-nci; and two Pilot Project grants from the American Cancer Society's Institutional Grant Award to the University of South Carolina (IRG-13-043-01) https://www.cancer.org/ (SH; BS).

California Public Opinion On Health Professionals Talking With Patients About Firearms

Medical and public health organizations have recommended that health professionals discuss firearm safety with patients at risk for gun-related injury, yet few health professionals do so. Concerns that patients may view conversations about firearms as inappropriate have been reported in prior studies. Using state-representative data from the 2018 California Safety and Wellbeing Survey, this study found that most Californians report gun safety conversations with health professionals to be at least sometimes appropriate when these conversations involved a patient who had a known risk factor for firearm-related harm (depending on the risk factor, 83.7-90.2 percent among all respondents and 70.0-91.2 percent among firearm owners). Majorities of respondents also found intervention by health professionals for those at imminent risk to be at least sometimes appropriate (depending on the intervention, 84.0-89.9 percent among all respondents and 82.6-91.0 percent among firearm owners). These findings can inform health policy and education on clinical strategies for preventing firearm-related harm.

Malpractice and Patient Safety Concerns

OBJECTIVES

"Assurance behaviors," a type of defensive medicine, involve physicians' utilization of additional patient services to avoid adverse legal outcomes. We aim to compare the use of clinical behaviors (such as ordering additional tests, services, and consultations) due to malpractice concerns with the same behaviors due to patient safety concerns.

METHODS

A national sample of dermatopathologists (n = 160) completed an online survey.

RESULTS

Participants reported using one or more of five clinical behaviors due to concerns about medical malpractice (95%) and patient safety (99%). Self-reported use of clinical behaviors due to malpractice concerns and patient safety concerns was compared, including ordering additional immunohistochemistry/molecular tests (71% vs 90%, respectively, P < .0001), recommending additional surgical sampling (78% vs 91%, P < .0001), requesting additional slides (81% vs 95%, P < .0001), obtaining second reviews (78% vs 91%, P < .0001), and adding caveats into reports regarding lesion difficulty (85% vs 89%, P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Dermatopathologists use many clinical behaviors both as assurance behaviors and due to patient safety concerns, with a higher proportion reporting patient safety concerns as a motivation for specific behaviors.

When People You Love Are The Unintended Consequences Of Opioid Policy

After the release of federal guidelines to curb opioid misuse, a patient is unable to obtain effective pain treatment and dies from complications.

Safety huddle in a community nursing setting

A safety huddle is a meeting held among district nurses, allied health professionals, specialist nurses, administrative staff, community matrons and healthcare assistants, also known as the wider multidisciplinary team. This article aims to identify and discuss the importance of safety huddles within a community nursing team. The author, a Specialist Community Practitioner District Nurse (SCPDN), explores why safety huddles were introduced and the implications of staff and patient safety if a safety huddle is not performed. The article also discusses the role of the SCPDN, how patient harm is sustained when communication failures occur within a team, new technologies implemented into practice and the implementation of safety huddles electronically.

Simulation-based education to promote confidence in managing clinical aggression at a paediatric hospital

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of incidents involving aggressive behaviour in acute care hospitals are being witnessed worldwide. Acute care hospital staff are often not trained or confident in managing aggression. Competent management of clinical aggression is important to maintain staff and patient safety. Training programmes for acute care staff are infrequently described in the literature and rarely reported for paediatric staff. Simulation training allows practice of skills without patient risk and may be more effective than traditional teaching formats for aggression management.

AIM AND DESIGN

The aim of this proof of concept study was to develop a simulation-based education session on aggression management for acute care paediatric staff based on best practice principles, to evaluate the acceptability of this training programme and to gain an understanding of the impact of the training on participants' perceived confidence in managing clinical aggression. Two separate simulation exercises were delivered as a 2-h component of a hospital management of clinical aggression (MOCA) training day. Participants completed a written survey immediately prior to, at completion of the simulation-based group training, and at 3-6 months following the simulation training.

FINDINGS

Nine training days were conducted in 2017 for nursing, medical, allied health, education and security staff with a total of 146 participants (83% were acute care nurses). Two thirds (68%) of participants had experienced clinical aggression as part of their routine work, with 51% overall reporting a lack of confidence managing these patients. Immediately following the simulation training, 80% of all participants reported feeling more confident in managing clinical aggression, 47% reported a 1-point increase in confidence, whilst 33% of participants reported a 2- or 3-point increase. At 3-6 months post-training, 66% of respondents (N = 44) reported continued confidence in managing aggression with 100% of participants stating they would recommend simulation training to colleagues.

CONCLUSIONS

Simulation training is an acceptable method of training and shows promise to improve staff-perceived confidence for managing behavioural emergencies in acute paediatric health care settings. In addition, there were potential enduring positive impacts at 3 months after the study. Whilst resource and time intensive, further research assessing the benefits of utilising simulation training in this setting is warranted in order to minimise staff burn-out and improve outcomes for these very vulnerable patients.

The impact of person-centred care on patient safety: An umbrella review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Nursing literature frequently emphasises the benefits of person-centred approaches for healthcare quality and safety.

OBJECTIVE

This umbrella review aimed to synthesise the combined evidence from systematic reviews assessing the impact of person-centred care interventions on patient safety.

DESIGN

A three-step review process included a preliminary review of literature, a comprehensive search, and manual searching of reference lists and forward citations of selected reviews. The review protocol was registered with Prospero (CRD42018090048).

DATA SOURCES

Reviewers searched 10 databases for systematic reviews published in English-language peer-reviewed journals between 2000 and 2019: Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, JBI Database, Medline, ProQuest Health & Medicine, PROSPERO Register, PubMed and Scopus.

REVIEW METHODS

Covidence software was used to manage screening and eligibility. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, reviewed full texts of articles for eligibility, and appraised the quality of reviews using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses.

RESULTS

From an initial total of 3412 potential titles, 16 reviews met the inclusion criteria. The selected reviews examined the impact of person-centred care for diverse groups of patients (children, adults and older people) in varied settings. Most systematic reviews assessed experimental studies, generally comparing person-centred interventions with 'usual care', often demonstrating limited evidence of impact on safety. Reviews addressed several patient safety outcomes relevant to nursing, including falls, infections, medication use and misuse, and mortality rates. The systematic reviews were generally well conducted, although several included studies of poor or fair quality. Given the heterogeneity of the interventions, outcomes and research designs of studies included in the selected reviews, we were unable to draw unequivocal conclusions about the implications of person-centred care for patient safety in this umbrella review. However, there was some encouraging evidence that person-centred care initiatives may result in reduced rates of falls (in acute care and residential aged care settings). The review also highlighted reductions in agitation for people with dementia and some improvement in anti-psychotic medication use in older people with dementia.

CONCLUSIONS

Although abundant evidence exists demonstrating the positive effects of person-centred care on healthcare quality and on patient (and provider) wellbeing, there is little research focussing specifically on the impact of person-centred care on patient safety. Thus, there is scope for further high-quality nursing research into how person-centred interventions improve specific patient safety outcomes in order to inform more widespread adoption of person-centred practice.

Adverse events in psychiatry: a national cohort study in Sweden with a unique psychiatric trigger tool

BACKGROUND

The vast majority of patient safety research has focused on somatic health care. Although specific adverse events (AEs) within psychiatric healthcare have been explored, the overall level and nature of AEs is sparsely investigated.

METHODS

Cohort study using a retrospective record review based on a two-step trigger tool methodology in the charts of randomly selected patients 18 years or older admitted to the psychiatric acute care departments in all Swedish regions from January 1 to June 30, 2017. Hospital care together with corresponding outpatient care were reviewed as a continuum, over a maximum of 3 months. The AEs were categorised according to type, severity and preventability.

RESULTS

In total, the medical records of 2552 patients were reviewed. Among the patients, 50.4% were women and 49.6% were men. The median (range) age was 44 (18-97) years for women and 44.5 (18-93) years for men. In 438 of the reviewed records, 720 AEs were identified, corresponding to the AEs identified in 17.2% [95% confidence interval, 15.7-18.6] of the records. The majority of AEs resulted in less or moderate harm, and 46.2% were considered preventable. Prolonged disease progression and deliberate self-harm were the most common types of AEs. AEs were significantly more common in women (21.5%) than in men (12.7%) but showed no difference between age groups. Severe or catastrophic harm was found in 2.3% of the records, and the majority affected were women (61%). Triggers pointing at deficient quality of care were found in 78% of the records, with the absence of a treatment plan being the most common.

CONCLUSIONS

AEs are common in psychiatric care. Aside from further patient safety work, systematic interventions are also warranted to improve the quality of psychiatric care.

Patient-related factors associated with an increased risk of being a reported case of preventable harm in first-line health care: a case-control study

Background

Patient safety issues in primary health care and in emergency departments have not been as thoroughly explored as patient safety issues in the hospital setting. Knowledge is particularly sparse regarding which patients have a higher risk of harm in these settings. The objective was to evaluate which patient-related factors were associated with risk of harm in patients with reports of safety incidents.

Methods

A case–control study performed in primary health care and emergency departments in Sweden. In total, 4536 patients (cases) and 44,949 controls were included in this study. Cases included patients with reported preventable harm in primary health care and emergency departments from January 1st, 2011 until December 31st, 2016.

Results

Psychiatric disease, including all psychiatric diagnoses regardless of severity, nearly doubled the risk of being a reported case of preventable harm (odds ratio, 1.96; p < 0.001). Adjusted for income and education there was still an increased risk (odds ratio, 1.69; p < 0.001). The preventable harm in this group was to 46% diagnostic errors of somatic disease.

Conclusion

Patients with psychiatric illness are at higher risk of preventable harm in primary care and the emergency department. Therefore, this group needs extra attention to prevent harm.

Reducing delays to diagnosis in ambulatory care settings: A macrocognition perspective

We aim to use a macrocognition theoretical perspective to characterize contributors to diagnostic delays by physicians that can be mitigated by work system redesign. As experienced with other complex, sociotechnical domains, system redesign is anticipated to be more effective at improving safety than training-based solutions. In the outpatient care setting, complex tasks, conducted by a primary care provider, are provided for five macrocognition functions: sensemaking, re-planning, detecting problems, deciding, and coordinating. Redesigning systems could reduce delays to diagnosis by helping users to avoid missed symptoms, forgotten follow-up activities, and delayed actions. Health information technology could support resilience strategies by offloading documentation burdens, recording working diagnoses, displaying planned follow-up activities at the correct time interval, and supporting recognition of patterns in patient care. These insights suggest a path forward for future research on system design innovations to reduce diagnostic delays, and ultimately, reduce patient harm.

Interactional misalignment in the UK NHS 111 healthcare telephone triage service

BACKGROUND

A recent review of primary care serious incidents suggests that diagnosis and assessment problems, underpinned by communication failures, involving the UK telephone triage service, NHS 111, may contribute to patient harm.

METHODS

The present study utilised conversation analysis to address the lack of evaluative research examining the NHS 111 system and in particular interactions between system components (call handler, computerized decision support system, patients/caller).

RESULTS

Analysis of audio recorded call interactions revealed interactional misalignment across four mapped call phases (eliciting caller details, establishing reason for call, completing the Pathways assessment, and agreeing the outcome). This misalignment has the capacity to increase the risk of system failure, particularly in relation to assessment problems and issues related to the accurate transfer of care advice. Our analysis suggests that efforts to enhance the NHS 111 system, similar telehealth services, and patient safety management more generally, should shift their focus from a limited set of individual components towards a system-specific interactionist perspective encompassing all elements.

CONCLUSIONS

Further evaluative research is required in order to build a comprehensive evidence-base concerning the multiple interacting factors influencing patient safety in the NHS 111 system.

[Overtreatment in nursing-does it exist?]

BACKGROUND

In recent years "overtreatment" and "overdiagnosis" have become well discussed problems in medicine.

OBJECTIVES

Similar to medicine, could some nursing interventions be classified as "overtreatment in nursing"?

METHODS

The available literature was evaluated and the different kinds of "overtreatment in nursing" are described. Ritualised nursing interventions are critically reflected upon. A definition for the term "overtreatment in nursing" is suggested and potential implications on daily nursing practice are presented.

RESULTS

At the moment only little is known about "overtreatment in nursing". In fact this term has not been defined or discussed yet. However, different studies in medical settings have shown that nursing interventions might have negative impacts on the patients' condition. In the practical field of nursing, different causes of "overtreatment in nursing" can be identified and there are some approaches, which examine possibilities on how to deal with the problem.

CONCLUSIONS

It is very likely that nursing interventions may have a negative impact on patients' health and recovery. Thus, defining the term "overtreatment in nursing" would be desirable. Moreover efforts should be made to find out more about the effects of "overtreatment in nursing" and possible preventive interventions.

Clinical pharmacist interventions in managing drug-related problems in hospitalized patients with neurological diseases

Background Drug-related problems (DRPs) are common in hospitalized patients with neurological diseases. Clinical pharmacy services could minimize drug-related harm and improve patient care. Objective To identify common DRPs in neurology and document clinical pharmacists' medication-related interventions. Setting The wards and intensive care unit of the Department of Neurology at Assiut University Hospital. Method Prospective study of clinical pharmacists' interventions during the routine care work of reviewing patients medical charts over a period of 6 months from January to June 2017. Main outcome measure The frequency and severity of DRPs and clinical pharmacists' recommendations. Results Out of 1421 reviewed medications charts, a total of 414 DRPs were detected for 285 admitted patients. The most common DRPs were drug selection problems (36.7%) and dosing errors (27.5%). The majority of DRPs (71.7%) were categorized as causing no patient harm. Clinical pharmacists provided recommendations for the detected problems that ranged from drug monitoring to stop and starting new medicines. About 90% of pharmacists' interventions were accepted by physicians. Poisson regression of factors that may influence the frequency of DRPs revealed significant associations of patient age (p = 0.03) and the number of comorbid diseases (p = 0.01). Conclusions Prescribing errors in neurology inpatient are likely to occur. Clinical pharmacists' interventions assisted in early detection of drug problems and prevention of the consequent patient harms.

[Description of contributing factors in adverse events related to patient safety and their preventability]

Objetivo

Evaluar el grado en que los sucesos adversos (SA) ligados a la asistencia sanitaria alcanzan al paciente y su severidad. Analizar los factores contribuyentes a la aparición de SA, la relación con el daño provocado y el grado de evitabilidad.

Diseño

Estudio descriptivo retrospectivo.

Emplazamiento

Servicio de Atención Primaria de Porriño desde enero de 2014 a abril de 2016.

Participantes y/o contexto

Se incluyeron notificaciones de SA en el Sistema de Notificación y Aprendizaje para Seguridad del Paciente (SiNASP).

Método

Variables de medida: incidente adverso (IA) si no alcanzó al paciente o no produjo daño, evento adverso (EA) si llegó al paciente con daño. Grado de daño clasificado como mínimo, menor, moderado, crítico y catastrófico. Evitabilidad registrada como escasa evidencia de ser evitable, 50% evitable y sólida evidencia de ser evitable. Análisis de datos: porcentajes y test de chi-cuadrado para variables cualitativas; p < 0,05 con SPSS.15 Fuente de datos: SiNASP. Consideraciones éticas: autorizado por el Comité de Ética de Investigación (2016/344).

Resultados

Se registraron 166 SA (50,0% hombres, 46,4% mujeres; edad media: 60,80 años). El 62,7% alcanzaron al paciente. EA: 45,8% produjeron daño mínimo y 2,4%, daño crítico. Los profesionales fueron factor contribuyente en el 71,7% de los EA, encontrándose tendencia a la asociación entre deficiente comunicación y ausencia de protocolos con el daño producido. Grado de evitabilidad: 96,4%.

Conclusiones

La mayoría de los SA alcanzaron al paciente, estando relacionados con la medicación, pruebas diagnósticas y errores de laboratorio. El grado de daño se asoció con problemas de comunicación, ausencia o deficiencia de protocolos y escasa cultura en seguridad.

Free Choice and Patient Best Interests

In medical practice, the doctrine of informed consent is generally understood to have priority over the medical practitioner's duty of care to her patient. A common consequentialist argument for the prioritisation of informed consent above the duty of care involves the claim that respect for a patient's free choice is the best way of protecting that patient's best interests; since the patient has a special expertise over her values and preferences regarding non-medical goods she is ideally placed to make a decision that will protect her interests. In this paper I argue against two consequentialist justifications for a blanket prioritisation of informed consent over the duty of care by considering cases in which patients have imperfect access to their overall best interests. Furthermore, I argue that there are cases where the mere presentation of choice under the doctrine of informed consent is detrimental to patient best interests. I end the paper by considering more nuanced approaches to resolving the conflict between informed consent and the duty of care and consider the option of permitting patients to waive informed consent.

Patients' Values in Clinical Decision-Making

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision-making involves the participation of patient and dental practitioner. Well-informed decision-making requires that both parties understand important concepts that may influence the decision. This fourth article in a series of 4 aims to discuss the importance of patients' values when a clinical decision is made.

METHODS

We report on how to incorporate important concepts for well-informed, shared decision-making. Here, we present patient values as an important issue, in addition to previously established topics such as the risk of bias of a study, cost-effectiveness of treatment approaches, and a comparison of therapeutic benefit with potential side effects.

RESULTS

We provide 2 clinical examples and suggestions for a decision tree, based on the available evidence.

CONCLUSION

The information reported in this article may improve the relationship between patient and dental practitioner, resulting in more well-informed clinical decisions.

Evaluating benefits and harm of therapies

OBJECTIVE

This third article in a series of 4 aims to inform dental practitioners on the importance of weighing benefits and harm when making clinical treatment decisions.

METHODS

This article describes some examples of important consequences to patients' health when potential side effects of interventions are not taken into consideration in the decision-making process. Some information to help dental practitioners search for data on negative effects of therapies is also presented, and the need to weigh benefits and harm of therapies is discussed.

RESULTS

Therapeutic interventions in dentistry may cause several side effects, such as nerve damage caused by dental implant placement. Adequate evaluation of potential side effects before performing a procedure and comprehensive communication with the patient about these side effects are sine qua non conditions for any clinical decision.

CONCLUSIONS

The information provided in this article may encourage dental practitioners to obtain more information regarding negative aspects of clinical interventions, to more comprehensively inform patients and to improve clinical decision-making.