Search

Reema Harrison,1 Merrilyn Walton,2 Jennifer Smith-Merry,3 Elizabeth Manias,4,5 Rick Iedema6 1Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, UNSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 2School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 3Centre for Disability Research and Policy, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 4School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Deakin University, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 5Department of Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; 6Centre for Team-Based Practice and Learning in Health Care, King’s College London, London, UK Purpose: The aim of this study was to explore the service and policy structures that impact open disclosure (OD) practices in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Participants and methods: An explorative study using semi-structured interviews was undertaken with 12 individuals closely involved in the implementation of OD in hospitals at policy or practice levels within the state of NSW, Australia. Interviews explored the service and policy structures surrounding OD and the perceived impact of these on the implementation of the OD policy. These data were thematically analyzed to understand the factors facilitating and creating barriers to openness after adverse events. Results: The data identified three key areas in which greater alignment between OD policy and the wider service and policy structures may enhance the implementation of OD practice: 1) alignment between OD and root cause analysis processes, 2) holistic training that links to other relevant processes such as communicating bad news, risk management, and professional regulation and insurance, and 3) policy clarification regarding the disclosure of incidents that result in no or low-level harm. Conclusion: Evidence from this study indicates that formal OD processes are not routinely applied after adverse events in NSW, despite clear guidelines for OD. The reasons for this are unclear as the service-level and policy-level phenomena that support or hinder OD are understudied. This knowledge is critical to addressing the policy-practice gap. Our paper provides insights regarding the influence of current service-level and policy-level phenomena on the delivery of OD and how policy clarification may contribute to addressing some of the challenges for implementing OD policy. The principles of virtue ethics – specifically, openness and the involvement of service users – may contribute to progressing in this area. Keywords: incident disclosure, adverse events, health policy, hospitals, patient-centered care, qualitative research

BACKGROUND:Assessment of clinical variation has attracted increasing interest in health systems internationally due to growing awareness about better value and appropriate health care as a mechanism for enhancing efficient, effective and timely care. Feedback using administrative databases to provide benchmarking data has been utilised in several countries to explore clinical care variation and to enhance guideline adherent care. Whilst methods for detecting variation are well-established, methods for determining variation that is unwarranted and addressing this are strongly debated. This study aimed to synthesize published evidence of the use of feedback approaches to address unwarranted clinical variation (UCV). METHODS:A rapid review and narrative evidence synthesis was undertaken as a policy-focused review to understand how feedback approaches have been applied to address UCV specifically. Key words, synonyms and subject headings were used to search the major electronic databases Medline and PubMed between 2000 and 2018. Titles and abstracts of publications were screened by two reviewers and independently checked by a third reviewer. Full text articles were screened against the eligibility criteria. Key findings were extracted and integrated in a narrative synthesis. RESULTS:Feedback approaches that occurred over a duration of 1 month to 9 years to address clinical variation emerged from 27 publications with quantitative (20), theoretical/conceptual/descriptive work (4) and mixed or multi-method studies (3). Approaches ranged from presenting evidence to individuals, teams and organisations, to providing facilitated tailored feedback supported by a process of ongoing dialogue to enable change. Feedback approaches identified primarily focused on changing clinician decision-making and behaviour. Providing feedback to clinicians was identified, in a range of a settings, as associated with changes in variation such as reducing overuse of tests and treatments, reducing variations in optimal patient clinical outcomes and increasing guideline or protocol adherence. CONCLUSIONS:The review findings suggest value in the use of feedback approaches to respond to clinical variation and understand when action is warranted. Evaluation of the effectiveness of particular feedback approaches is now required to determine if there is an optimal approach to create change where needed.

OBJECTIVES:To examine the feasibility of a behavioural e-learning intervention to support nurses to manage interruptions during medication administration. DESIGN:A cluster randomised feasibility trial. SETTING:The cluster trial included four intervention and four control wards randomly selected across four metropolitan hospitals in Sydney, Australia. PARTICIPANTS:We observed 806 (402 pre-intervention and 404 post-intervention) medication events, where nurses prepared and administered medications to patients within the cluster wards. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome measured was the observed number of interruptions occurring during administration, with secondary outcomes being the number of clinical errors and procedural failures. Changes in the use of behavioural strategies to manage interruptions, targeted by the e-learning intervention, were also assessed. RESULTS:No significant differences were found in the number of interruptions (P = 0.82), procedural failures (P = 0.19) or clinical errors per 100 medications (P = 0.32), between the intervention and control wards. Differences in the use of specific behavioural strategies (engagement and multitasking) were found in the intervention wards. CONCLUSION:This behavioural e-learning intervention has not been found to significantly reduce interruptions, however, changes in the use of strategies did occur. Careful selection of clinical settings where there is a high number of predictable interruptions is recommended for further research into the impact of the behavioural e-learning intervention. An increase in the intensity of this intervention is recommended with training undertaken away from the clinical setting. Further research on additional consumer-sensitive interventions is urgently needed.

The following patient story is taken verbatim from a junior doctor’s recount of an adverse event submitted to the ECCHo handover survey