Notification of abnormal lab test results in an electronic medical record: do any safety concerns remain?

BACKGROUND: Follow-up of abnormal outpatient laboratory test results is a major patient safety concern. Electronic medical records can potentially address this concern through automated notification. We examined whether automated notifications of abnormal laboratory results (alerts) in an integrated electronic medical record resulted in timely follow-up actions. METHODS: We studied 4 alerts: hemoglobin A1c > or =15%, positive hepatitis C antibody, prostate-specific antigen > or =15 ng/mL, and thyroid-stimulating hormone > or =15 mIU/L. An alert tracking system determined whether the alert was acknowledged (ie, provider clicked on and opened the message) within 2 weeks of transmission; acknowledged alerts were considered read. Within 30 days of result transmission, record review and provider contact determined follow-up actions (eg, patient contact, treatment). Multivariable logistic regression models analyzed predictors for lack of timely follow-up. RESULTS: Between May and December 2008, 78,158 tests (hemoglobin A1c, hepatitis C antibody, thyroid-stimulating hormone, and prostate-specific antigen) were performed, of which 1163 (1.48%) were transmitted as alerts; 10.2% of these (119/1163) were unacknowledged. Timely follow-up was lacking in 79 (6.8%), and was statistically not different for acknowledged and unacknowledged alerts (6.4% vs 10.1%; P =.13). Of 1163 alerts, 202 (17.4%) arose from unnecessarily ordered (redundant) tests. Alerts for a new versus known diagnosis were more likely to lack timely follow-up (odds ratio 7.35; 95% confidence interval, 4.16-12.97), whereas alerts related to redundant tests were less likely to lack timely follow-up (odds ratio 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: Safety concerns related to timely patient follow-up remain despite automated notification of non-life-threatening abnormal laboratory results in the outpatient setting.

Stakeholder analysis combined with social network analysis provides fine-grained insights into water infrastructure planning processes

Environmental policy and decision-making are characterized by complex interactions between different actors and sectors. As a rule, a stakeholder analysis is performed to understand those involved, but it has been criticized for lacking quality and consistency. This lack is remedied here by a formal social network analysis that investigates collaborative and multi-level governance settings in a rigorous way. We examine the added value of combining both elements. Our case study examines infrastructure planning in the Swiss water sector. Water supply and wastewater infrastructures are planned far into the future, usually on the basis of projections of past boundary conditions. They affect many actors, including the population, and are expensive. In view of increasing future dynamics and climate change, a more participatory and long-term planning approach is required. Our specific aims are to investigate fragmentation in water infrastructure planning, to understand how actors from different decision levels and sectors are represented, and which interests they follow. We conducted 27 semi-structured interviews with local stakeholders, but also cantonal and national actors. The network analysis confirmed our hypothesis of strong fragmentation: we found little collaboration between the water supply and wastewater sector (confirming horizontal fragmentation), and few ties between local, cantonal, and national actors (confirming vertical fragmentation). Infrastructure planning is clearly dominated by engineers and local authorities. Little importance is placed on longer-term strategic objectives and integrated catchment planning, but this was perceived as more important in a second analysis going beyond typical questions of stakeholder analysis. We conclude that linking a stakeholder analysis, comprising rarely asked questions, with a rigorous social network analysis is very fruitful and generates complementary results. This combination gave us deeper insight into the socio-political-engineering world of water infrastructure planning that is of vital importance to our well-being.

'Saying it without words': a qualitative study of oncology staff's experiences with speaking up about safety concerns.

OBJECTIVES To explore the experiences of oncology staff with communicating safety concerns and to examine situational factors and motivations surrounding the decision whether and how to speak up using semistructured interviews. SETTING 7 oncology departments of six hospitals in Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS Diverse sample of 32 experienced oncology healthcare professionals. RESULTS Nurses and doctors commonly experience situations which raise their concerns and require questioning, clarifying and correcting. Participants often used non-verbal communication to signal safety concerns. Speaking-up behaviour was strongly related to a clinical safety issue. Most episodes of 'silence' were connected to hygiene, isolation and invasive procedures. In contrast, there seemed to exist a strong culture to communicate questions, doubts and concerns relating to medication. Nearly all interviewees were concerned with 'how' to say it and in particular those of lower hierarchical status reflected on deliberate 'voicing tactics'. CONCLUSIONS Our results indicate a widely accepted culture to discuss any concerns relating to medication safety while other issues are more difficult to voice. Clinicians devote considerable efforts to evaluate the situation and sensitively decide whether and how to speak up. Our results can serve as a starting point to develop a shared understanding of risks and appropriate communication of safety concerns among staff in oncology.

Trade-offs between voice and silence: a qualitative exploration of oncology staff's decisions to speak up about safety concerns

BACKGROUND Research suggests that "silence", i.e., not voicing safety concerns, is common among health care professionals (HCPs). Speaking up about patient safety is vital to avoid errors reaching the patient and thus to prevent harm and also to improve a culture of teamwork and safety. The aim of our study was to explore factors that affect oncology staff's decision to voice safety concerns or to remain silent and to describe the trade-offs they make. METHODS In a qualitative interview study with 32 doctors and nurses from 7 oncology units we investigated motivations and barriers to speaking up towards co-workers and supervisors. An inductive thematic content analysis framework was applied to the transcripts. Based on the individual experiences of participants, we conceptualize the choice to voice concerns and the trade-offs involved. RESULTS Preventing patients from serious harm constitutes a strong motivation to speaking up but competes with anticipated negative outcomes. Decisions whether and how to voice concerns involved complex considerations and trade-offs. Many respondents reflected on whether the level of risk for a patient "justifies" the costs of speaking up. Various barriers for voicing concerns were reported, e.g., damaging relationships. Contextual factors, such as the presence of patients and co-workers in the alarming situation, affect the likelihood of anticipated negative outcomes. Speaking up to well-known co-workers was described as considerably easier whereas "not knowing the actor well" increases risks and potential costs of speaking up. CONCLUSIONS While doctors and nurses felt strong obligation to prevent errors reaching individual patients, they were not engaged in voicing concerns beyond this immediacy. Our results offer in-depth insight into fears and conditions conducive of silence and voicing and can be used for educational interventions and leader reinforcement.

Silence That Can Be Dangerous: A Vignette Study to Assess Healthcare Professionals' Likelihood of Speaking up about Safety Concerns

PURPOSE To investigate the likelihood of speaking up about patient safety in oncology and to clarify the effect of clinical and situational context factors on the likelihood of voicing concerns. PATIENTS AND METHODS 1013 nurses and doctors in oncology rated four clinical vignettes describing coworkers' errors and rule violations in a self-administered factorial survey (65% response rate). Multiple regression analysis was used to model the likelihood of speaking up as outcome of vignette attributes, responder's evaluations of the situation and personal characteristics. RESULTS Respondents reported a high likelihood of speaking up about patient safety but the variation between and within types of errors and rule violations was substantial. Staff without managerial function provided significantly higher levels of decision difficulty and discomfort to speak up. Based on the information presented in the vignettes, 74%-96% would speak up towards a supervisor failing to check a prescription, 45%-81% would point a coworker to a missed hand disinfection, 82%-94% would speak up towards nurses who violate a safety rule in medication preparation, and 59%-92% would question a doctor violating a safety rule in lumbar puncture. Several vignette attributes predicted the likelihood of speaking up. Perceived potential harm, anticipated discomfort, and decision difficulty were significant predictors of the likelihood of speaking up. CONCLUSIONS Clinicians' willingness to speak up about patient safety is considerably affected by contextual factors. Physicians and nurses without managerial function report substantial discomfort with speaking up. Oncology departments should provide staff with clear guidance and trainings on when and how to voice safety concerns.

Frequency of and predictors for withholding patient safety concerns among oncology staff: a survey study.

Speaking up about patient safety is vital to avoid errors reaching the patient and to improve a culture of safety. This study investigated the prevalence of non-speaking up despite concerns for safety and aimed to identify predictors for withholding voice among healthcare professionals (HCPs) in oncology. A self-administered questionnaire assessed safety concerns, speaking up beliefs and behaviours among nurses and doctors from nine oncology departments. Multiple regression analysis was used to identify predictors for withholding safety concerns. A total of 1013 HCPs returned the completed survey (response rate 65%). Safety concerns were common among responders. Fifty-four per cent reported to recognise their colleagues making potentially harmful errors at least sometimes. A majority of responders reported at least some episodes of withholding concerns about patient safety. Thirty-seven per cent said they remained silent at least once when they had information that might have helped prevent an incident. Respondents believed that a high level of interpersonal, communication and coping skills are necessary to speak up about patient safety issues at their workplace. Higher levels of perceived advocacy for patient safety and psychological safety significantly decreased the frequency of withholding voice. Remaining silent about safety concerns is a common phenomenon in oncology. Improved strategies are needed to support staff in effective communication and make cancer care safer.

How much management is enough? Stakeholder views on forest management in fire-prone areas in central Portugal

With the increasing pressure to improve the contribution of forests to help dealing with global changes, it is critical to understand the different perceptions of those involved in the forest. How do forest owners, managers and members of local communities who often depend on the forest, value it and what are the problems affecting the forests in terms of being able to meet these new challenges? In Portugal, this task has taken on an even greater priority as more than 90% of the forest is private and forest management relies on the individual decisions of thousands of forest owners. To understand stakeholder views on forest and forest management, a transversal social perception survey was implemented in the form of a case study of central Portugal which included decision-makers, local technicians, forest owners and the general public. The results show that there is a consensus on the main issues affecting forests and forest management. A shift from classic forest owners to the emergence of indifferent forest owners was observed, although this shift has not been recognized by the forest owners in the survey, who maintain the individual management of their properties.

Effectiveness of Justice-Based Measures in Managing Trust and Privacy Concerns on Social Networking Sites: Intercultural Perspective

The unprecedented success of social networking sites (SNSs) has been recently overshadowed by concerns about privacy risks. As SNS users grow weary of privacy breaches and thus develop distrust, they may restrict or even terminate their platform activities. In the long run, these developments endanger SNS platforms’ financial viability and undermine their ability to create individual and social value. By applying a justice perspective, this study aims to understand the means at the disposal of SNS providers to leverage the privacy concerns and trusting beliefs of their users—two important determinants of user participation on SNSs. Considering that SNSs have a global appeal, empirical tests assess the effectiveness of justice measures for three culturally distinct countries: Germany, Russia and Morocco. The results indicate that these measures are particularly suited to address trusting beliefs of SNS audience. Specifically, in all examined countries, procedural justice and the awareness dimension of informational justice improve perceptions of trust in the SNS provider. Privacy concerns, however, are not as easy to manage, because the impact of justice-based measures on privacy concerns is not universal. Beyond theoretical value, this research offers valuable practical insights into the use of justice-based measures to promote trust and mitigate privacy concerns in a cross-cultural setting.

Guidelines for WB3 Part III: Stakeholder workshop 2: Selection and decision on prevention and mitigation strategies to be implemented

These guidelines were developed in the context of working block 3 of the DESIRE project. They address the facilitators in the 18 DESIRE study sites and support them in conducting stakeholder workshops aiming at the selection and decision on mitigation strategies to be implemented in the study site context. The decision-making process is supported by a multi-objective decision support system (MODSS) Software called 'Facilitator'.

A methodology for appraising and selecting strategies to mitigate desertification based on stakeholder participation and global best practices

The main aim of the methodology presented in this paper is to provide a framework for a participatory process for the appraisal and selection of options to mitigate desertification and land degradation. This methodology is being developed within the EU project DESIRE (www.desire-project.eu/) in collaboration with WOCAT (www.wocat.org). It is used to select promising conservation strategies for test-implementation in each of the 16 degradation and desertification hotspot sites in the Mediterranean and around the world. The methodology consists of three main parts: In a first step, prevention and mitigation strategies already applied at the respective DESIRE study site are identified and listed during a workshop with representatives of different stakeholders groups (land users, policy makers, researchers). The participatory and process-oriented approach initiates a mutual learning process among the different stakeholders by sharing knowledge and jointly reflecting on current problems and solutions related to land degradation and desertification. In the second step these identified, locally applied solutions (technologies and approaches) are assessed with the help of the WOCAT methodology. Comprehensive questionnaires and a database system have been developed to document and evaluate all relevant aspects of technical measures as well as implementation approaches by teams of researchers and specialists, together with land users. This research process ensures systematic assessing and piecing together of local information, together with specific details about the environmental and socio-economic setting. The third part consists of another stakeholder workshop where promising strategies for sustainable land management in the given context are selected, based on the best practices database of WOCAT, including the evaluated locally applied strategies at the DESIRE sites. These promising strategies will be assessed with the help of a selection and decision support tool and adapted for test-implementation at the study site.

Further Concerns About Glutamine: A Case Report on Hyperammonemic Encephalopathy.

OBJECTIVE We report a case of a woman with hyperammonemic encephalopathy following glutamine supplementation. DESIGN Case report. INTERVENTIONS Plasma amino acid analysis suggestive of a urea cycle defect and initiation of a treatment with lactulose and the two ammonia scavenger drugs sodium benzoate and phenylacetate. Together with a restricted protein intake ammonia and glutamine plasma levels decreased with subsequent improvement of the neurological status. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Massive catabolism and exogenous glutamine administration may have contributed to hyperammonemia and hyperglutaminemia in this patient. CONCLUSION This case adds further concerns regarding glutamine administration to critically ill patients and implies the importance of monitoring ammonia and glutamine serum levels in such patients.

A multi-level stakeholder approach to sustainable land management

Soils provide us with over 90% of all human food, livestock feed, fibre and fuel on Earth. Soils, however, have more than just productive functions. The key challenge in coming years will be to address the diverse and potentially conflicting demands now being made by human societies and other forms of life, while ensuring that future generations have the same potential to use soils and land of comparable quality. In a multi-level stakeholder approach, down-to-earth action will have to be supplemented with measures at various levels, from households to communities, and from national policies to international conventions. Knowledge systems, both indigenous and scientific, and related research and learning processes must play a central role. Ongoing action can be enhanced through a critical assessment of the impact of past achievements, and through better cooperation between people and institutions.

A stakeholder analysis of the Texas Youth Commission issue for the Texas 80th Legislative Session

The following is a policy analysis based on the Advocacy Coalition Framework by Paul Sabatier. The study question was who were the stakeholders in the legislative process for the issue of the Texas Youth Commission (TYC) overhaul during the Texas 80th Legislative Session. This analysis included the stakeholders identifying characteristics including beliefs and interests, goals and resources, and finally, the winning legislative solutions as embodied in three bills that were passed. The study linked the stakeholders with three bills and expanded on the literature for the stakeholder group of Policy Brokers. The conclusions were that all stakeholders including Youth Advocates, the Policy People and Policy Brokers were effective in advancing legislative solutions to address the need for an agency overhaul of TYC and that the three new policies will be evaluated in the future as either short term change or long-term reforms based on their implementation. ^