Search

Background Emergency physicians (EPs) provide care to older adults with complex health problems. Treating these patients is challenging for many EPs, which might originate from modest geriatric education. Objective Our aim was to assess EPs’ self-perceived needs regarding geriatric emergency medicine (GEM) education, factors determining these needs and the utilization of this education. Our secondary aim was to assess emergency department (ED) managers’ view and support for GEM education. Methods All EPs and ED managers in the Netherlands received a survey by e-mail. The questionnaires focused on EPs’ needs in GEM education, EPs’ utilization of GEM education and managerial support for GEM education. We used descriptive statistics to analyse needs, utilization of- and support for GEM education. Regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with EPs’ need for GEM education. Results EPs reported to need better training in diagnosing, treating and communicating with older adults. Seventy percent of EPs reported no GEM education program in their hospital, and 83% reported no utilization of GEM education outside their hospital. EPs working in EDs with a possibility for geriatric consultation, and EPs aware of actual GEM education programs, had lower educational needs. Of responding managers, 86.2% reported the care for older adults as an important topic; lack of finances and time were obstacles to provide GEM education for EPs. Conclusion EPs in the Netherlands feel insufficiently educated to treat older adults. ED managers largely recognize this educational challenge. This nationwide survey underlines the need to prioritize GEM education for EPs.

ObjectivesWith the 'teach-back' method, patients or carers repeat back what they understand, so that professionals can confirm comprehension and correct misunderstandings. The effectiveness of teach-back has been underexamined, particularly for older patients discharged from the emergency department (ED). We aimed to determine whether teach-back would reduce ED revisits and whether it would increase patients’ retention of discharge instructions, improve self-management at home and increase satisfaction with the provision of instructions.MethodsA nonrandomised pre–post pilot evaluation in the ED of one Dutch academic hospital including patients discharged from the ED receiving standard discharge care (pre) and teach-back (post). Primary outcomes were ED-revisits within 7 days and within 8–30 days postdischarge. Secondary outcomes for a subsample of older adults were retention of instructions, self-management 72 hours after discharge and satisfaction with the provision of discharge instructions.ResultsA total of 648 patients were included, 154 were older adults. ED revisits within 7 days and within 8–30 days were lower in the teach-back group compared with those receiving standard discharge care: adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of 0.23 (95% CI 0.05 to 1.07) and 0.42 (95% CI 0.14 to 1.33), respectively. Participants in the teach-back group had an increased likelihood of full knowledge retention on information related to their ED diagnosis and treatment (AOR 2.19; 95% CI 1.01 to 4.75; p=0.048), medication (AOR 14.89; 95% CI 4.12 to 53.85; p>0.001) and follow-up appointments (AOR 3.86; 95% CI 1.33 to 10.19; p=0.012). Use of teach-back was not significantly associated with improved self-management and higher satisfaction with discharge instructions. Discharge conversations were generally shorter for participants receiving teach-back.ConclusionsDischarging patients from the ED with a relatively simple and feasible teach-back method can contribute to safer and better transitional care from the ED to home.

Background The number and efficacy of indicators used to monitor and improve the quality of care in Intensive Care Units (ICU) is debatable. This study aimed to select a consensus-based core set of indicators for effective quality improvement in the ICU. Methods A Delphi study with a panel of intensivists, ICU nurses, and former ICU patients or relatives (n = 34) from general, teaching, and academic hospitals. Panelists completed a questionnaire in which they scored 69 preselected quality indicators on relevance using a nine-point Likert scale. Indicators were categorized using the rated relevance score into: ‘accepted, ‘equivocal’ and ‘excluded’. Questionnaire results were discussed in focus groups to reach consensus on the final set. Results Response rates for the questionnaire and focus groups were 100 and 68%, respectively. Consensus was reached on a final set of 17 quality indicators including patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient reported experience measures (PREMs). Other quality indicators relate to the organization and outcome of ICU care, including safety culture, ICU standardized mortality ratio, and the process indicator ‘learning from and improving after serious incidents’. Conclusions ICU clinicians and former patients and relatives developed a consensus-based core set of ICU quality indicators that is relatively short but comprehensive and particularly tailored to end-users needs.

Contains fulltext : 282726.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) OBJECTIVES: Knowledge of patient's health literacy (HL) in the emergency department (ED) can facilitate care delivery and reduce poor health outcomes. This systematic review investigates HL measurement instruments used in the ED and their psychometric properties, accuracy in detecting limited HL, and feasibility. METHODS: We searched in five biomedical databases for studies published between 1990 and January 2021, evaluating HL measurement instruments tested in the ED on internal consistency, criterion validity, diagnostic accuracy, or feasibility. Reviewers screened studies for relevance and assessed methodologic quality with published criteria. Data were synthesized around study and instrument characteristics and outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Of the 2,376 references screened, seven met our inclusion criteria. Studied instruments varied in objective (n = 5) and subjective (n = 6) measurement of HL skills, and in HL constructs measured. The Brief Health Literacy Screen (BHLS) and the Subjective Numeracy Scale demonstrate acceptable and good internal consistency across studies. None of the instruments perform consistently well on criterion validity. The Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine-Revised and the Newest Vital Sign, both objective tests with short administration times, demonstrate good accuracy in one study with high risk of bias. The BHLS, a short subjective measure, shows moderate accuracy across studies including one with low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Several short instruments seem valid in measuring HL and accurate in detecting limited HL among ED patients, each with its practical advantages and disadvantages and specific measurement of HL. Additional research is necessary to develop a robust evidence base supporting these instruments.

Objectives: Gaining an understanding of postoperative patients’ environmental needs, barriers, and facilitators for optimal healing. Background: An optimal hospital environment (the “healing environment”) can enhance patients’ postoperative recovery and shorten length of stay. However, insights lack into patients’ lived environmental needs for optimal healing after surgery and how these needs are being met. Method: A qualitative study was conducted between August 2016 and August 2017 with 21 patients who underwent elective major abdominal surgery in a Dutch university hospital. Data were collected through context-mapping exercises and interviews to capture patients’ lived experiences and explore the meaning of these experiences. Data were systematically analyzed according to the principles of thematic content analysis. Results: Three themes were identified. First, participants want a sense of control over their treatment, ambient features, privacy, nutrition, and help requests. Participants described the need for positive distractions: personalizing the room, connecting with the external environment, and the ability to undertake activities. Finally, participants expressed the importance of functional, practical, and emotional support from professionals, peers, and relatives. According to participants, the hospital environment often does not meet their healing needs while being hospitalized. Conclusion: The hospital environment often does not meet patients’ needs. Needs fulfillment can be improved by practical adjustments to the physical and interpersonal environment and considering patient’s individual preferences and changing needs during recovery. Patient narratives, pictures, and drawings are valuable sources for hospital managers in their efforts to design evidence-based environments that anticipate to patient-specific needs for achieving early recovery.

Emergency physicians (EPs) often regard care for older adults as complex, while they lack sufficient geriatric skills. This study evaluates the effect of a geriatric education program on EPs’ geriatric knowledge, attitude and medical practice when treating older adults. A mixed-methods study was performed on EPs from two Dutch hospitals. Effects were measured by pre–post tests of EPs’ (n = 21) knowledge of geriatric syndromes and attitudes toward older adults, and by a retrospective pre–post analysis of 100 records of patients aged 70 years or more. Six EPs were purposively sampled and interviewed after completion of the education program. The program significantly improved EPs’ geriatric knowledge. EPs indicated that the program improved their ability and attentiveness to recognize frailty and geriatric syndromes. The program also significantly improved EPs’ attention for the older patient’s social history and circumstances (P = 0.04) but did not have a significant effect on medical decision making. EPs valued especially the case-based teaching and indicated that the interactive setting helped them to better understand and retain knowledge. Combined quantitative and qualitative data suggest that EPs benefit from geriatric emergency teaching. Future enhancement and evaluation of the geriatric education program is needed to confirm benefits to clinical practice and patient outcomes.

Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has been associated with stress and challenges for healthcare professionals, especially for those working in the front-line of treating COVID-19 patients. This study aimed to: 1) assess changes in well-being and perceived stress symptoms of Dutch emergency department (ED) staff in the course of the first COVID-19 wave, and 2) assess and explore stressors experienced by ED staff since the COVID-19 outbreak. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study. An online questionnaire was administered during June–July 2020 to physicians, nurses and non-clinical staff of four EDs in the Netherlands. Well-being and stress symptoms (i.e., cognitive, emotional and physical) were scored for the periods pre, during and after the first COVID-19 wave using the World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5) and a 10-point Likert scale. Stressors were assessed and explored by rating experiences with specific situations (i.e., frequency and intensity of distress) and in free-text narratives. Quantitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations (GEE). Narratives were analyzed thematically. Results In total, 192 questionnaires were returned (39% response). Compared to pre-COVID-19, the mean WHO-5 index score (range: 0–100) decreased significantly with 14.1 points (p Conclusions The first COVID-19 wave took its toll on ED staff. Actions to limit drop-out and illness among staff resulting from psychological distress are vital to secure acute care for (non-)COVID-19 patients during future infection waves.

Background In 2015, a national research agenda was established for Dutch prehospital EMS to underpin the evidence base of care delivery and inform policymakers and funders. The continuously increasing demand for ambulance care and the reorientation towards the role of EMS in recent years may have changed research priorities. Therefore, this study aimed to update the Dutch national EMS research agenda. Methods A three-round online Delphi survey was used to explore and discuss different viewpoints and to reach consensus on research priorities (i.e., themes and special interest groups, e.g. patient types who require specific research attention). A multidisciplinary expert panel (n = 62) was recruited in the field of prehospital EMS and delegates of relevant professional organizations and stakeholders participated. In round one, fifty-nine research themes and six special interest groups (derived from several resources) were rated on importance on a 5-point scale by the panel members. In round two, the panel selected their priority themes and special interest groups (yes/no), and those with a positive difference score were further assessed in round three. In this final round, appropriateness of the remaining themes and agreement within the panel was taken into account, following the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method, which resulted in the final list of research priorities. Results The survey response per round varied between 94 and 100 percent. In round one, a reduction from 59 to 25 themes and the selection of three special interest groups was realized. Round two resulted in the prioritization of six themes and one special interest group ('Vulnerable elderly'). Round three showed an adequate level of agreement regarding all six themes: 'Registration and (digital) exchange of patient data in the chain of emergency care'; 'Mobile care consultation/Non conveyance'; 'Care coordination'; 'Cooperation with professional partners within the care domain'; 'Care differentiation' and 'Triage and urgency classification'. Conclusions The updated Dutch national EMS research agenda builds further on the previous version and introduces new EMS research priorities that correspond with the future challenges prehospital EMS care is faced with. This agenda will guide researchers, policymakers and funding bodies in prioritizing future research projects.

Background Emergency department (ED) visits due to non-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) conditions have drastically decreased since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to identify the magnitude, characteristics and underlying motivations of ED visitors with delayed healthcare seeking behaviour during the first wave of the pandemic. Methods Between March 9 and July 92,020, adults visiting the ED of an academic hospital in the East of the Netherlands received an online questionnaire to collect self-reported data on delay in seeking emergency care and subsequent motivations for this delay. Telephone interviews were held with a subsample of respondents to better understand the motivations for delay as described in the questionnaire. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were thematically analysed. Results One thousand three hundred thirty-eight questionnaires were returned (34.0% response). One in five respondents reported a delay in seeking emergency care. Almost half of these respondents (n = 126; 45.4%) reported that the pandemic influenced the delay. Respondents reporting delay were mainly older adults (mean 61.6; ±13.1 years), referred to the ED by the general practitioner (GP; 35.1%) or a medical specialist (34.7%), visiting the ED with cardiac problems (39.7%). The estimated median time of delay in receiving ED care was 3 days (inter quartile range 8 days). Respectively 46 (16.5%) and 26 (9.4%) respondents reported that their complaints would be either less severe or preventable if they had sought for emergency care earlier. Delayed care seeking behaviour was frequently motivated by: fear of contamination, not wanting to burden professionals, perceiving own complaints less urgent relative to COVID-19 patients, limited access to services, and by stay home instructions from referring professionals. Conclusions A relatively large proportion of ED visitors reported delay in seeking emergency care during the first wave. Delay was often driven by misperceptions of the accessibility of services and the legitimacy for seeking emergency care. Public messaging and close collaboration between the ED and referring professionals could help reduce delayed care for acute needs during future COVID-19 infection waves.

ObjectiveOlder adults are hospitalised from the emergency department (ED) without potentially needing hospital care. Knowledge about rates, associative factors and causes of these preventable emergency admissions (PEAs) is limited. This study aimed to determine the rates, associative factors and causes for PEAs of older adults.DesignA mixed-method observational study.SettingThe EDs of two Dutch hospitals.Participants492 patients aged >70 years and hospitalised from the ED.MeasurementsQuantitative data were retrospectively extracted from the electronical medical record over a 1-month period. Admissions were classified (non)preventable based on a standardised approach. Univariate and multivariate multilevel logistic regression analyses were performed to identify possible associations between PEAs and demographic, clinical and care process factors. Qualitative data were prospectively collected by email and telephone interviews and analysed thematically to explore hospital physician’s perceived causes for the identified PEAs.ResultsOf the 492 included cases, 86 (17.5%) were classified as PEA. Patients with a higher age (adjusted OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.08; p=0.04), a low urgency classification (adjusted OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.15; p=0.01), and attending the ED in the weekend (adjusted OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.37; pConclusionsOur findings contribute to existing evidence that many emergency admissions of older adults are preventable, thereby indicating a possible source of unnecessary expensive, and potentially harmful, hospital care.

BackgroundWearable devices can be used for continuous patient monitoring in the general ward, increasing patient safety. Little is known about the experiences and expectations of patients and health care professionals regarding continuous monitoring with these devices.ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify positive and negative effects as well as barriers and facilitators for the use of two wearable devices: ViSi Mobile (VM) and HealthPatch (HP).MethodsIn this randomized controlled trial, 90 patients admitted to the internal medicine and surgical wards of a university hospital in the Netherlands were randomly assigned to continuous vital sign monitoring using VM or HP and a control group. Users’ experiences and expectations were addressed using semistructured interviews. Nurses, physician assistants, and medical doctors were also interviewed. Interviews were analyzed using thematic content analysis. Psychological distress was assessed using the State Trait Anxiety Inventory and the Pain Catastrophizing Scale. The System Usability Scale was used to assess the usability of both devices.ResultsA total of 60 patients, 20 nurses, 3 physician assistants, and 6 medical doctors were interviewed. We identified 47 positive and 30 negative effects and 19 facilitators and 36 barriers for the use of VM and HP. Frequently mentioned topics included earlier identification of clinical deterioration, increased feelings of safety, and VM lines and electrodes. No differences related to psychological distress and usability were found between randomization groups or devices.ConclusionsBoth devices were well received by most patients and health care professionals, and the majority of them encouraged the idea of monitoring vital signs continuously in the general ward. This comprehensive overview of barriers and facilitators of using wireless devices may serve as a guide for future researchers, developers, and health care institutions that consider implementing continuous monitoring in the ward.Trial RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02933307; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02933307.

BackgroundThe growing demand for elderly care often exceeds the ability of emergency department (ED) services to provide quality of care within reasonable time. The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of interventions on reducing ED crowding by older patients, and to identify core characteristics shared by successful interventions.MethodsSix major biomedical databases were searched for (quasi)experimental studies published between January 1990 and March 2017 and assessing the effect of interventions for older patients on ED crowding related outcomes. Two independent reviewers screened and selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data into a standardized form. Data were synthesized around the study setting, design, quality, intervention content, type of outcome and observed effects.ResultsOf the 16 included studies, eight (50%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), two (13%) were non-RCTs and six (34%) were controlled before-after (CBA) studies. Thirteen studies (81%) evaluated effects on ED revisits and four studies (25%) evaluated effects on ED throughput time. Thirteen studies (81%) described multicomponent interventions. The rapid assessment and streaming of care for older adults based on time-efficiency goals by dedicated staff in a specific ED unit lead to a statistically significant decrease of ED length of stay (LOS). An ED-based consultant geriatrician showed significant time reduction between patient admission and geriatric review compared to an in-reaching geriatrician.ConclusionInter-study heterogeneity and poor methodological quality hinder drawing firm conclusions on the intervention’s effectiveness in reducing ED crowding by older adults. More evidence-based research is needed using uniform and valid effect measures.Trial registrationThe protocol is registered with the PROSPERO International register of systematic reviews: ID = CRD42017075575).

Contains fulltext : 215444.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) OBJECTIVES: To evaluate geriatric education programs for emergency department (ED) professionals based on: content and teaching methods and learning outcome effects and factors promoting or hindering program implementation. DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING: ED. PARTICIPANTS: Physicians, nurses, and medical residents working in the ED. METHODS AND MEASUREMENT: Five major biomedical databases were searched for (quasi) experimental studies, published between 1990 and April 2018, evaluating geriatric education programs for ED professionals. Data were synthesized around study quality, learning participants, teaching content and methods, and Kirkpatrick learning outcomes. RESULTS: Nine before-after studies were included. Learners were mostly ED residents and, to a smaller extent, ED nurses and physicians. Study quality was moderate, with the lowest scores on sampling and instrument validity. Programs varied from a 1-day workshop to a 2-year curriculum, mostly combining didactic lectures with active and experiential learning formats. Topics commonly addressed included managing: geriatric syndromes, trauma and falls, medication, atypical presentations, and care transitions. Statistically significant improvements were mostly found in learners' knowledge acquisition (six studies). Significant improvements were also found in single studies on: self-reported geriatric screening, documentation of geriatric care, and appropriate urinary catheter placement. Factors promoting program implementation included: solving competing educational demands and busy work schedules, embedding the program in preexisting curricula, and close collaboration between emergency and geriatric medicine faculties. CONCLUSIONS: Various geriatric education programs improve the geriatric knowledge of ED professionals and seem to positively impact their clinical practice. However, more program evaluations with larger study samples, and use of valid and reliable outcome measures, are needed to provide robust evidence on the effectiveness of such programs. J Am Geriatr Soc, 1-8, 2019. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2402-2409, 2019.

ObjectiveTo explore associations among twenty formal and informal, societal and individual-level factors and quality of life (QOL) among people living with congestive heart failure (CHF) in two settings with different healthcare and social care systems and sociocultural contexts.Setting and participantsWe recruited 367 adult patients with CHF from a single heart failure clinic within two countries with different national social to healthcare spending ratios: Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States (US), and Nijmegen, Netherlands (NL).DesignCross-sectional survey study. We adapted the Social Quality Model (SQM) to organize twenty diverse factors into four categories: Living Conditions (formal-societal: e.g., housing, education), Social Embeddedness (informal-societal: e.g., social support, trust), Societal Embeddedness (formal-individual: e.g., access to care, legal aid), and Self-Regulation (informal-individual: e.g., physical health, resilience). We developed a survey comprising validated instruments to assess each factor. We administered the survey in-person or by mail between March 2017 and August 2018.OutcomesWe used Cantril's Self-Anchoring Scale to assess overall QOL. We used backwards stepwise regression to identify factors within each SQM category that were independently associated with QOL among US and NL participants (pResults367 CHF patients from the US (32%) and NL (68%) participated. Among US participants, financial status, receiving legal aid or housing assistance, and resilience were associated with QOL, and together explained 49% of the variance in QOL; among NL participants, financial status, perceived physical health, independence in activities of daily living, and resilience were associated with QOL, and explained 53% of the variance in QOL.ConclusionsFour formal and informal factors explained approximately half of the variance in QOL among patients with CHF in the US and NL.

Purpose To systematically review and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions in order to improve the safety and efficiency of patient handover between intensive care unit (ICU) and general ward healthcare professionals at ICU discharge. Methods PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for intervention studies with the aim to improve clinical handover between ICU and general ward healthcare professionals that had been published up to and including June 2013. The methods for article inclusion and data analysis were pre-specified and aligned with recommendations outlined in the PRISMA guideline. Two reviewers independently extracted data (study purpose, setting, population, method of sampling, sample size, intervention characteristics, outcome, and implementation activities) and assessed the quality of the included studies. Results From the 6,591 citations initially extracted from the six databases, we included 11 studies in this review. Of these, six (55 %) reported statistically significant effects. Effective interventions included liaison nurses to improve communication and coordination of care and forms to facilitate timely, complete and accurate handover information. Effective interventions resulted in improved continuity of care (e.g., reduced discharge delay) and in reduced adverse events. Inconsistent effects were observed for use of care, namely, reduction of length of stay versus increase of readmissions to higher care. No statistically significant effects were found in the reduction of mortality. The overall methodological quality of the 11 studies reviewed was relatively low, with an average score of 4.5 out of 11 points. Conclusions This review shows that liaison nurses and handover forms are promising interventions to improve the quality of patient handover between the ICU and general ward. More robust evidence is needed on the effectiveness of interventions aiming to improve ICU handover and supportive implementation strategies. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00134-015-3666-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

IntroductionThe USA lags behind other high-income countries in many health indicators. Outcome differences are associated with differences in the relative spending between healthcare and social services at the national level. The impact of the ratio and delivery of social and healthcare services on the individual patient’s health is however unknown. ‘Reframing Healthcare Services through the Lens of Co-Production’ (RheLaunCh) will be a cross-Atlantic comparative study of the mechanisms by which healthcare and social service delivery may impact patient health with chronic conditions. Insight into these mechanisms is needed to better and cost-effectively organise healthcare and social services.MethodsWe designed a mixed methods study to compare the socioeconomic background, needs of and service delivery to patients with congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the USA and the Netherlands. We will conduct: (1) a literature scan to compare national and regional healthcare and social service systems; (2) a retrospective database study to compare patient’s socioeconomic and clinical characteristics and the service use and spending at the national, regional and hospital level; (3) a survey to compare patient perceived quality of life, receipt and experience of service delivery and ability of these services to meet patient needs; and (4) multiple case studies to understand what patients need to better govern their quality of life and how needs are met by services.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was granted by the ethics committee of the Radboud University Medical Center (2016–2423) in the Netherlands and by the Human Subjects Research Committee of the Hennepin Health Care System, Inc. (HSR #16–4230) in the USA. Multiple approaches will be used for dissemination of results, including (inter)national research presentations and peer-reviewed publications. A website will be established to support the development of a community of practice.

Background Insight into the effects of ethnic disparities on patients' perioperative safety is necessary for the development of tailored improvement strategies. The aim of this study was to review the literature on safety differences between patients from minority ethnic groups and those from the ethnic majority undergoing surgery. Methods PubMed, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and Embase were searched using predefined inclusion criteria for available studies from January 1990 to January 2013. After quality assessment, the study data were organized on the basis of outcome, statistical significance and the direction of the observed effects. Relative risks for mortality were calculated. Results After screening 3105 studies, 26 studies were identified. Nine of these 26 studies showed statistically significant higher mortality rates for patients from minority ethnic groups. Meta-analysis demonstrated a greater risk of mortality for these patients compared with patients from the Caucasian majority in studies performed both in North America (risk ratio 1·22, 95 per cent confidence interval 1·05 to 1·42) and outside (risk ratio 2·25, 1·40 to 3·62). For patients from minority groups, the length of hospital or intensive care unit stay was significantly longer in five studies, and complication rates were significantly higher in ten. Methods used to identify patient ethnicity were not described in 14 studies. Conclusion Patients from minority ethnic groups, in North America and elsewhere, have an increased risk of perioperative death and complications. More insight is needed into the causes of ethnic disparities to pursue safer perioperative care for patients of minority ethnicity.

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Organizational culture is seen as having a growing impact on quality and safety of health care, but its impact on hospital to community patient discharge is relatively unknown. OBJECTIVES: To explore aspects of organizational culture to develop a deeper understanding of the discharge process. RESEARCH DESIGN: A qualitative study of stakeholders in the discharge process. Grounded Theory was used to analyze the data. SUBJECTS: In 5 European Union countries, 192 individual and 25 focus group interviews were conducted with patients and relatives, hospital physicians, hospital nurses, general practitioners, and community nurses. RESULTS: Three themes emerged representing aspects of organizational culture: a fragmented hospital to primary care interface, undervaluing administrative tasks relative to clinical tasks in the discharge process, and lack of reflection on the discharge process or process improvement. Nine categories were identified: inward focus of hospital care providers, lack of awareness to needs, skills, and work patterns of the professional counterpart, lack of a collaborative attitude, relationship between hospital and primary care providers, providing care in a "here and now" situation, administrative work considered to be burdensome, negative attitude toward feedback, handovers at discharge ruled by habits, and appreciating and integrating new practices. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the data, we hypothesize that the extent to which hospital care providers value handovers and the outreach to community care providers is critical to effective hospital discharge. Community care providers often are insufficiently informed about patient outcomes. Ongoing challenges with patient discharge often remain unspoken with opportunities for improvement overlooked. Interventions that address organizational culture as a key factor in discharge improvement efforts are needed.

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Much of the research on improving patient handovers has focused on enhancing communication within the hospital system, but there have been relatively few efforts aimed at addressing the challenges at the interface between the hospital and the primary care setting. METHODS: A qualitative thematic analysis using a clinical microsystems lens applied to 28 semi-structured key stakeholder interviews in the Netherlands. Data were organised into seven 'virtual' clinical microsystem datasets composed of patients, hospital-based physicians, hospital-based nurses and community-based general practitioners. RESULTS: Five themes that contributed to effective or ineffective handovers emerged from our analysis: (1) lack of adequate information; (2) healthcare professionals' availability and opportunity for personal contact; (3) feedback, teaching and protocols related to handovers; (4) information technology facilitated communication solutions; and (5) the role and responsibility of patients. Our analysis suggests that each healthcare professional attempted to provide the best care possible, but did this largely in isolation, and without the benefit of the knowledge and expertise of the other members of the microsystem. CONCLUSIONS: The microsystem approach offers an innovative organisational construct and approach to assess the gaps in 'hospital to community' patient handovers, by viewing the hospital to the community interface as a clinical microsystem continuum. Our application of the microsystem approach confirms and extends earlier findings about the impact of barriers on the continuity and safety of patient transitions and their impact on the quality of patient care.

Background: Patient safety experts have postulated that increasing patient participation in communications during patient handovers will improve the quality of patient transitions, and that this may reduce hospital readmissions. Choosing strategies that enhance patient safety through improved handovers requires better understanding of patient experiences and preferences for participation. Objective: The aim of this paper is to explore the patients' experiences and perspectives related to the handovers between their primary care providers and the inpatient hospital. Methods: A qualitative secondary analysis was performed, based on individual and focus group patient interviews with 90 patients in five European countries. Results: The analysis revealed three themes: patient positioning in the handover process; prerequisites for patient participation and patient preferences for the handover process. Patients' participation ranged from being the key actor, to sharing the responsibility with healthcare professional(s), to being passive participants. For active participation patients required both personal and social resources as well as prerequisites such as information and respect. Some patients preferred to be the key actor in charge; others preferred their healthcare professionals to be the key actors in the handover. Conclusions: Patients' participation is related to the healthcare system, the activity of healthcare professionals' and patients' capacity for participation. Patients prefer a handover process where the responsibility is clear and unambiguous. Healthcare organisations need a clear and well-considered system of responsibility for handover processes, that takes into account the individual patient's need of clarity, and support in relation to his/hers own recourses.

Contains fulltext : 172783.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) OBJECTIVES: To systematically review interventions that aim to improve the governance of patient safety within emergency care on effectiveness, reliability, validity and feasibility. DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and PsychInfo were searched for studies published between January 1990 and July 2014. We included studies evaluating interventions relevant for higher management to oversee and manage patient safety, in prehospital emergency medical service (EMS) organisations and hospital-based emergency departments (EDs). Two reviewers independently selected candidate studies, extracted data and assessed study quality. Studies were categorised according to study quality, setting, sample, intervention characteristics and findings. RESULTS: Of the 18 included studies, 13 (72%) were non-experimental. Nine studies (50%) reported data on the reliability and/or validity of the intervention. Eight studies (44%) reported on the feasibility of the intervention. Only 4 studies (22%) reported statistically significant effects. The use of a simulation-based training programme and well-designed incident reporting systems led to a statistically significant improvement of safety knowledge and attitudes by ED staff and an increase of incident reports within EDs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Characteristics of the interventions included in this review (eg, anonymous incident reporting and validation of incident reports by an independent party) could provide useful input for the design of an effective tool to govern patient safety in EMS organisations and EDs. However, executives cannot rely on a robust set of evidence-based and feasible tools to govern patient safety within their emergency care organisation and in the chain of emergency care. Established strategies from other high-risk sectors need to be evaluated in emergency care settings, using an experimental design with valid outcome measures to strengthen the evidence base.

To give an overview of instruments for early detection of quality and safety risks for integrated risk management in hospitals.Systematic literature review and qualitative research.A review of literature in three databases (PubMed, CINAHL and Embase) was conducted to establish which instruments are known from academic literature. Articles were selected if the effectiveness and feasibility of the instrument for risk management had been evaluated. We also examined the references of the articles found, and searched for grey literature. Moreover, 19 experts from healthcare and other sectors were interviewed in order to verify which instruments are used in practice and to study the factors influencing implementation in hospitals.We found more than 60 instruments which we divided into 12 categories. Interviewees reported that a combination of instruments is required in order to assess all of the quality and safety risks, the main elements being: (a) the patient as source; (b) brainstorming sessions and consultation in networks, i.e. verbal exchange of risks between departments and organisations; (c) insight into the performance of individual healthcare professionals and teams; and (d) site visits. For instruments to work as effectively as possible, a culture is essential in which care providers recognise and discuss risks. There is also a need for a management system including all hospital risks, allowing an integrated, efficient approach to risk.There are several instruments for early detection of quality and safety risks for integrated risk management in hospitals. The predictive value of the instruments requires further investigation.

Background There is a growing impetus to reorganize the hospital discharge process to reduce avoidable readmissions and costs. The aim of this study was to provide insight into hospital discharge problems and underlying causes, and to give an overview of solutions that guide providers and policy-makers in improving hospital discharge. Methods The Intervention Mapping framework was used. First, a problem analysis studying the scale, causes, and consequences of ineffective hospital discharge was carried out. The analysis was based on primary data from 26 focus group interviews and 321 individual interviews with patients and relatives, and involved hospital and community care providers. Second, improvements in terms of intervention outcomes, performance objectives and change objectives were specified. Third, 220 experts were consulted and a systematic review of effective discharge interventions was carried out to select theory-based methods and practical strategies required to achieve change and better performance. Results Ineffective discharge is related to factors at the level of the individual care provider, the patient, the relationship between providers, and the organisational and technical support for care providers. Providers can reduce hospital readmission rates and adverse events by focusing on high-quality discharge information, well-coordinated care, and direct and timely communication with their counterpart colleagues. Patients, or their carers, should participate in the discharge process and be well aware of their health status and treatment. Assessment by hospital care providers whether discharge information is accurate and understood by patients and their community counterparts, are important examples of overcoming identified barriers to effective discharge. Discharge templates, medication reconciliation, a liaison nurse or pharmacist, regular site visits and teach-back are identified as effective and promising strategies to achieve the desired behavioural and environmental change. Conclusions This study provides a comprehensive guiding framework for providers and policy-makers to improve patient handover from hospital to primary care. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1472-6963-14-389) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Ethics-of-care theories contain important notions regarding the quality of care; however, until now, concrete translations of the insights into instruments are lacking. This may be a result of the completely different type of epistemology, theories and concepts used in the field of quality of care research. Objectives: Both the fields of ‘ethics of care’ and ‘quality of care’ aim for improvement of care; therefore; insights could possibly meet by focusing on the following question: How could ethics-of-care theories contribute to better quality in care at a measurement level? This study reviews existing instruments with the aim of bridging this gap and examines the evidence of their psychometric properties, feasibility and responsiveness. Research design: A systematic search of the literature was undertaken using multiple electronic databases covering January 1990 through May 2012. Method and findings: Of the 3427 unique references identified, 55 studies describing 40 instruments were selected. Using a conceptual framework, an attempt was made to distinguish between related concepts and to group available instruments measuring different types of concepts. A total of 13 instruments that reflect essential aspects of ethics-of-care theory were studied in greater detail, and a quality assessment was conducted. Conclusion: Three promising qualitative instruments were found, which follow the logic of the patient and take their specific context into account.

Item does not contain fulltext OBJECTIVE: To identify barriers experienced and perceived at discharge by physicians, nurses, patients and relatives. DESIGN: We developed questionnaires based on focus group interviews with hospital and community care providers, and individual interviews with patients and relatives. A survey was conducted among patients, relatives and related nurses and physicians from hospital and community care. SETTING: One university hospital and the related community care area in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty health-care providers and eight patients and/or relatives participated in focus group and individual interviews. Questionnaires were returned by 344 health-care providers and 206 patients and relatives. RESULTS: Information from the hospital to community care is often incomplete, unclear and delayed. Especially hospital physicians (52%) and general practitioners (GPs; 63%) experience the quality of information exchanged from the hospital to the GP as poor. Coordination of care is often frustrated by a lack of care provider knowledge and collaboration. Hospital physicians (47%) and GPs (71%) feel that hospital physicians are often not sufficiently aware of the patient's home situation. Respectively, 59 and 81% experience that the GP is often not clearly informed about expected tasks and responsibilities at discharge. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that provides a clear picture of the experiences and perceptions of stakeholders regarding handovers at hospital discharge. Lack of knowledge, understanding and interest between hospital and community care providers are important causes for ineffective and unsafe discharge. The study suggests that improvement efforts should be focused more on these aspects, as primary conditions for improving hospital discharge.

Background: Advocates for quality and safety havecalled for healthcare that is patient-centred anddecision-making that involves patients.Objective: The aim of the paper is to explore thebarriers and facilitators to patient-centred care in thehospital discharge process.Methods: A qualitative study using purposive samplingof 192 individual interviews and 26 focus groupinterviews was conducted in five European Unioncountries with patients and/or family members,hospital physicians and nurses, and community generalpractitioners and nurses. A modified Grounded Theoryapproach was used to analyse the data.Results: The barriers and facilitators were classified into15 categories from which four themes emerged:(1) healthcare providers do not sufficiently prioritisedischarge consultations with patients and family membersdue to time restraints and competing care obligations;(2) discharge communication varied from instructingpatients and family members to shared decision-making;(3) patients often feel unprepared for discharge, andpostdischarge care is not tailored to individual patientneeds and preferences; and (4) pressure on availablehospital beds and community resources affect thedischarge process.Conclusions: Our findings suggest that involvement ofpatients and families in the preparations for discharge isdetermined by the extent towhich care providers arewillingand able to accommodate patients’ and families’ capabilities,needs and preferences. Future interventions should bedirected at healthcare providers’ attitudes and theirorganisation’s leadership, with afocus on improvingcommunication among care providers, patients and families,and between hospital and community care providers.

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Evidence shows that suboptimum handovers at hospital discharge lead to increased rehospitalizations and decreased quality of health care. PURPOSE: To systematically review interventions that aim to improve patient discharge from hospital to primary care. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycInfo, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched for studies published between January 1990 and March 2011. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized, controlled trials of interventions that aimed to improve handovers between hospital and primary care providers at hospital discharge. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently abstracted data on study objectives, setting and design, intervention characteristics, and outcomes. Studies were categorized according to methodological quality, sample size, intervention characteristics, outcome, statistical significance, and direction of effects. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of the 36 included studies, 25 (69.4%) had statistically significant effects in favor of the intervention group and 34 (94.4%) described multicomponent interventions. Effective interventions included medication reconciliation; electronic tools to facilitate quick, clear, and structured summary generation; discharge planning; shared involvement in follow-up by hospital and community care providers; use of electronic discharge notifications; and Web-based access to discharge information for general practitioners. Statistically significant effects were mostly found in reducing hospital use (for example, rehospitalizations), improvement of continuity of care (for example, accurate discharge information), and improvement of patient status after discharge (for example, satisfaction). LIMITATIONS: Heterogeneity of the interventions and study characteristics made meta-analysis impossible. Most studies had diffuse aims and poor descriptions of the specific intervention components. CONCLUSION: Many interventions have positive effects on patient care. However, given the complexity of interventions and outcome measures, the literature does not permit firm conclusions about which interventions have these effects. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The European Union, the Framework Programme of the European Commission.