Patient safety in dialysis access

Not only are dialysis access creation and maintenance prone to complications, but patients suffering from end-stage renal disease and its comorbidities generally have a high risk of adverse events during their continuous treatment. Preventive strategies are key to avoid harm and to improve the outcome of the treatment of the growing number of patients with chronic kidney failure, especially as doctors and nurses are not always aware of the consequences of unsafe behavior. This publication is intended for health care professionals – nurses as well as doctors – and aims to raise the awareness of patient safety aspects, combining medical education with evidence-based medicine. After a general overview of the topic, an international panel of authors provides a diversified insight into important concepts and technical tricks essential to create and maintain a functional dialysis access. Contributions to Nephrology, Vol. 184

Funding the utilization of community health workers in Texas

Community health workers (CHWs) are volunteers or paid members of communities that perform outreach, patient assistance, health education, and assist in navigation of healthcare system amongst other duties. The utilization of CHWs in hospital and community setting provides health benefits to their communities while reducing cost to the overall healthcare system. ^ The general population of Texas lacks adequate access to primary care. An important indicator of such a crisis is excessive usage of emergency department services in Texas, especially by the large minority population within the state. Also, unmanaged chronic diseases have been shown to be correlated with the excessive usage of emergency services. According to a recent survey of 25 Houston metropolitan area hospitals, almost 54% of the ER visits could have been resolved in primary care settings. A Galveston based study also indicated that the ER usage was higher amongst African-Americans and Latinos. Meanwhile, 28.5% of the total ER visits were made by Latinos from the surrounding areas (Begley et al., 2007). There is substantial evidence present which indicates enormous cost-savings that CHWs have produced in Texas and nationwide through reduction in unnecessary ER visits along with better management of chronic diseases (Fedder et al, 2003). ^ This paper provides an analysis regarding the need and importance for sustainable and stable sources of funding for Community health workers (CHWs) in Texas utilizing Kingdon's model of Agenda Setting as framework. The policy analysis is also aimed at reporting on the policy process and actions taken by Children at Risk to address this critical issue. Children at Risk, a Houston based advocacy organization, has created a legislative proposal that calls on the Texas Health and Human Commission to apply for a Medicaid §§1115 waiver to provide sustainable sources of funding for CHWs, Rep. John Zerwas sponsored HB 2244 bill and it was filed on March 3, 2011. The bill would affect the use of CHWs in Texas in two ways: 1) through the establishment and operation of a program designed to train and educate CHWs 2) by creating a statewide training and certification advisory committee. The advisory committee is required in the bill to submit recommendations for providing sustainable funding and employment for CHWs. The HB 2244 failed to move out of the House Public Health committee. However, HB2244 was amended into HB 2610 introduced by Representative Guillen. The House Bill 2610 is geared towards establishing a community-based navigator program in order to assist individuals applying for public assistance through the Internet. The House Bill 2610 was signed by the Governor and will be effective September 1, 2011.^

A conceptual model of organized primary care and comprehensive community health services.

Mode of access: Internet.

Accountability, organisational learning and risks to patient safety in England: conflict or compromise?

This article examines the current risk regulation regime, within the English National Health Service (NHS), by investigating the two, sometimes conflicting, approaches to risk embodied within the field of policies towards patient safety. The first approach focuses on promoting accountability and is built on legal principles surrounding negligence and competence. The second approach focuses on promoting learning from previous mistakes and near-misses, and is built on the development of a ‘safety culture’. Previous work has drawn attention to problems associated with risk-based regulation when faced with the dual imperatives of accountability and organisational learning. The article develops this by considering whether the NHS patient safety regime demonstrates the coexistence of two different risk regulation regimes, or merely one regime with contradictory elements. It uses the heuristic device of ‘institutional logics’ to examine the coexistence of and interrelationship between ‘organisational learning’ and ‘accountability’ logics driving risk regulation in health care.

Multiple component patient safety intervention in English hospitals:controlled evaluation of second phase

Objective: To independently evaluate the impact of the second phase of the Health Foundation's Safer Patients Initiative (SPI2) on a range of patient safety measures. Design: A controlled before and after design. Five substudies: survey of staff attitudes; review of case notes from high risk (respiratory) patients in medical wards; review of case notes from surgical patients; indirect evaluation of hand hygiene by measuring hospital use of handwashing materials; measurement of outcomes (adverse events, mortality among high risk patients admitted to medical wards, patients' satisfaction, mortality in intensive care, rates of hospital acquired infection). Setting: NHS hospitals in England. Participants: Nine hospitals participating in SPI2 and nine matched control hospitals. Intervention The SPI2 intervention was similar to the SPI1, with somewhat modified goals, a slightly longer intervention period, and a smaller budget per hospital. Results: One of the scores (organisational climate) showed a significant (P=0.009) difference in rate of change over time, which favoured the control hospitals, though the difference was only 0.07 points on a five point scale. Results of the explicit case note reviews of high risk medical patients showed that certain practices improved over time in both control and SPI2 hospitals (and none deteriorated), but there were no significant differences between control and SPI2 hospitals. Monitoring of vital signs improved across control and SPI2 sites. This temporal effect was significant for monitoring the respiratory rate at both the six hour (adjusted odds ratio 2.1, 99% confidence interval 1.0 to 4.3; P=0.010) and 12 hour (2.4, 1.1 to 5.0; P=0.002) periods after admission. There was no significant effect of SPI for any of the measures of vital signs. Use of a recommended system for scoring the severity of pneumonia improved from 1.9% (1/52) to 21.4% (12/56) of control and from 2.0% (1/50) to 41.7% (25/60) of SPI2 patients. This temporal change was significant (7.3, 1.4 to 37.7; P=0.002), but the difference in difference was not significant (2.1, 0.4 to 11.1; P=0.236). There were no notable or significant changes in the pattern of prescribing errors, either over time or between control and SPI2 hospitals. Two items of medical history taking (exercise tolerance and occupation) showed significant improvement over time, across both control and SPI2 hospitals, but no additional SPI2 effect. The holistic review showed no significant changes in error rates either over time or between control and SPI2 hospitals. The explicit case note review of perioperative care showed that adherence rates for two of the four perioperative standards targeted by SPI2 were already good at baseline, exceeding 94% for antibiotic prophylaxis and 98% for deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis. Intraoperative monitoring of temperature improved over time in both groups, but this was not significant (1.8, 0.4 to 7.6; P=0.279), and there were no additional effects of SPI2. A dramatic rise in consumption of soap and alcohol hand rub was similar in control and SPI2 hospitals (P=0.760 and P=0.889, respectively), as was the corresponding decrease in rates of Clostridium difficile and meticillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection (P=0.652 and P=0.693, respectively). Mortality rates of medical patients included in the case note reviews in control hospitals increased from 17.3% (42/243) to 21.4% (24/112), while in SPI2 hospitals they fell from 10.3% (24/233) to 6.1% (7/114) (P=0.043). Fewer than 8% of deaths were classed as avoidable; changes in proportions could not explain the divergence of overall death rates between control and SPI2 hospitals. There was no significant difference in the rate of change in mortality in intensive care. Patients' satisfaction improved in both control and SPI2 hospitals on all dimensions, but again there were no significant changes between the two groups of hospitals. Conclusions: Many aspects of care are already good or improving across the NHS in England, suggesting considerable improvements in quality across the board. These improvements are probably due to contemporaneous policy activities relating to patient safety, including those with features similar to the SPI, and the emergence of professional consensus on some clinical processes. This phenomenon might have attenuated the incremental effect of the SPI, making it difficult to detect. Alternatively, the full impact of the SPI might be observable only in the longer term. The conclusion of this study could have been different if concurrent controls had not been used.

Large scale organisational intervention to improve patient safety in four UK hospitals:mixed method evaluation

Objectives: To conduct an independent evaluation of the first phase of the Health Foundation's Safer Patients Initiative (SPI), and to identify the net additional effect of SPI and any differences in changes in participating and non-participating NHS hospitals. Design: Mixed method evaluation involving five substudies, before and after design. Setting: NHS hospitals in United Kingdom. Participants: Four hospitals (one in each country in the UK) participating in the first phase of the SPI (SPI1); 18 control hospitals. Intervention: The SPI1 was a compound (multicomponent) organisational intervention delivered over 18 months that focused on improving the reliability of specific frontline care processes in designated clinical specialties and promoting organisational and cultural change. Results: Senior staff members were knowledgeable and enthusiastic about SPI1. There was a small (0.08 points on a 5 point scale) but significant (P<0.01) effect in favour of the SPI1 hospitals in one of 11 dimensions of the staff questionnaire (organisational climate). Qualitative evidence showed only modest penetration of SPI1 at medical ward level. Although SPI1 was designed to engage staff from the bottom up, it did not usually feel like this to those working on the wards, and questions about legitimacy of some aspects of SPI1 were raised. Of the five components to identify patients at risk of deterioration - monitoring of vital signs (14 items); routine tests (three items); evidence based standards specific to certain diseases (three items); prescribing errors (multiple items from the British National Formulary); and medical history taking (11 items) - there was little net difference between control and SPI1 hospitals, except in relation to quality of monitoring of acute medical patients, which improved on average over time across all hospitals. Recording of respiratory rate increased to a greater degree in SPI1 than in control hospitals; in the second six hours after admission recording increased from 40% (93) to 69% (165) in control hospitals and from 37% (141) to 78% (296) in SPI1 hospitals (odds ratio for "difference in difference" 2.1, 99% confidence interval 1.0 to 4.3; P=0.008). Use of a formal scoring system for patients with pneumonia also increased over time (from 2% (102) to 23% (111) in control hospitals and from 2% (170) to 9% (189) in SPI1 hospitals), which favoured controls and was not significant (0.3, 0.02 to 3.4; P=0.173). There were no improvements in the proportion of prescription errors and no effects that could be attributed to SPI1 in non-targeted generic areas (such as enhanced safety culture). On some measures, the lack of effect could be because compliance was already high at baseline (such as use of steroids in over 85% of cases where indicated), but even when there was more room for improvement (such as in quality of medical history taking), there was no significant additional net effect of SPI1. There were no changes over time or between control and SPI1 hospitals in errors or rates of adverse events in patients in medical wards. Mortality increased from 11% (27) to 16% (39) among controls and decreased from17%(63) to13%(49) among SPI1 hospitals, but the risk adjusted difference was not significant (0.5, 0.2 to 1.4; P=0.085). Poor care was a contributing factor in four of the 178 deaths identified by review of case notes. The survey of patients showed no significant differences apart from an increase in perception of cleanliness in favour of SPI1 hospitals. Conclusions The introduction of SPI1 was associated with improvements in one of the types of clinical process studied (monitoring of vital signs) and one measure of staff perceptions of organisational climate. There was no additional effect of SPI1 on other targeted issues nor on other measures of generic organisational strengthening.

Organisational and systems factors impacting on patient safety in acute care organisations: lessons from four multi-site research studies

Background Patient safety is concerned with preventable harm in healthcare, a subject that became a focus for study in the UK in the late 1990s. How to improve patient safety, presented both a practical and a research challenge in the early 2000s, leading to the eleven publications presented in this thesis. Research question The overarching research question was: What are the key organisational and systems factors that impact on patient safety, and how can these best be researched? Methods Research was conducted in over 40 acute care organisations in the UK and Europe between 2006 and 2013. The approaches included surveys, interviews, documentary analysis and non-participant observation. Two studies were longitudinal. Results The findings reveal the nature and extent of poor systems reliability and its effect on patient safety; the factors underpinning cases of patient harm; the cultural issues impacting on safety and quality; and the importance of a common language for quality and safety across an organisation. Across the publications, nine key organisational and systems factors emerged as important for patient safety improvement. These include leadership stability; data infrastructure; measurement capability; standardisation of clinical systems; and creating an open and fair collective culture where poor safety is challenged. Conclusions and contribution to knowledge The research presented in the publications has provided a more complete understanding of the organisation and systems factors underpinning safer healthcare. Lessons are drawn to inform methods for future research, including: how to define success in patient safety improvement studies; how to take into account external influences during longitudinal studies; and how to confirm meaning in multi-language research. Finally, recommendations for future research include assessing the support required to maintain a patient safety focus during periods of major change or austerity; the skills needed by healthcare leaders; and the implications of poor data infrastructure.

Adaptive regulation or governmentality: patient safety and the changing regulation of medicine

Studies from across the world have shown that clinical mistakes are a major threat to the safety of patient care (World Health Organisation 2004). For the National Health Service (NHS) of England and Wales it is estimated that one in ten hospital patients experience some form of error, and each year these cost the service over £2billion in remedial care (Department of Health 2000). Unsurprisingly, ‘patient safety’ is now a major international health policy priority, questioning the efficacy of existing regulatory practices and proposing a new ethos of learning. Within England and Wales, the National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA) has been created to lead policy development and champion service-wide learning, whilst throughout the NHS the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) has been introduced to enable this learning (NPSA 2003). This paper investigates the extent to which, in seeking to better manage the threats to patient safety, this policy agenda represents a transition in medical regulation.

Safety and complexity: the inter-departmental threats to patient safety in the operating department

Purpose: Current thinking about ‘patient safety’ emphasises the causal relationship between the work environment and the delivery of clinical care. This research draws on the theory of Normal Accidents to extend this analysis and better understand the ‘organisational factors’ that threaten safety. Methods: Ethnographic research methods were used, with observations of the operating department setting for 18 month and interviews with 80 members of hospital staff. The setting for the study was the Operating Department of a large teaching hospital in the North-West of England. Results: The work of the operating department is determined by inter-dependant, ‘tightly coupled’ organisational relationships between hospital departments based upon the timely exchange of information, services and resources required for the delivery of care. Failures within these processes, manifest as ‘breakdowns’ within inter-departmental relationships lead to situations of constraint, rapid change and uncertainty in the work of the operating department that require staff to break with established routines and work with increased time and emotional pressures. This means that staff focus on working quickly, as opposed to working safely. Conclusion: Analysis of safety needs to move beyond a focus on the immediate work environment and individual practice, to consider the more complex and deeply structured organisational systems of hospital activity. For departmental managers the scope for service planning to control for safety may be limited as the structured ‘real world’ situation of service delivery is shaped by inter-department and organisational factors that are perhaps beyond the scope of departmental management.

Improving access for community health and sub-acute outpatient services: protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Waiting lists for treatment are common in outpatient and community services, Existing methods for managing access and triage to these services can lead to inequities in service delivery, inefficiencies and divert resources from frontline care. Evidence from two controlled studies indicates that an alternative to the traditional "waitlist and triage" model known as STAT (Specific Timely Appointments for Triage) may be successful in reducing waiting times without adversely affecting other aspects of patient care. This trial aims to test whether the model is cost effective in reducing waiting time across multiple services, and to measure the impact on service provision, health-related quality of life and patient satisfaction.

METHODS/DESIGN: A stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial has been designed to evaluate the impact of the STAT model in 8 community health and outpatient services. The primary outcome will be waiting time from referral to first appointment. Secondary outcomes will be nature and quantity of service received (collected from all patients attending the service during the study period and health-related quality of life (AQOL-8D), patient satisfaction, health care utilisation and cost data (collected from a subgroup of patients at initial assessment and after 12 weeks). Data will be analysed with a multiple multi-level random-effects regression model that allows for cluster effects. An economic evaluation will be undertaken alongside the clinical trial.

DISCUSSION: This paper outlines the study protocol for a fully powered prospective stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial (SWCRCT) to establish whether the STAT model of access and triage can reduce waiting times applied across multiple settings, without increasing health service costs or adversely impacting on other aspects of patient care. If successful, it will provide evidence for the effectiveness of a practical model of access that can substantially reduce waiting time for outpatient and community services with subsequent benefits for both efficiency of health systems and patient care.

The use of emergency medication kits in community palliative care: An exploratory survey of views of current practice in Australian home-based palliative care services

Improving symptom management for palliative care patients has obvious benefits for patients and advantages for the clinicians, as workload demands and work-related stress can be reduced when the emergent symptoms of patients are managed in a timely manner. The use of emergency medication kits (EMKs) can provide such timely symptom relief. The purpose of this study was to conduct a survey of a local service to examine views on medication management before and after the implementation of an EMK and to conduct a nationwide prevalence survey examining the use of EMKs in Australia. Most respondents from community palliative care services indicated that EMKs were not being supplied to palliative care patients but believed such an intervention could improve patient care.

Marginal costs of hospital-acquired conditions : information for priority-setting for patient safety programmes and research

Objective: To estimate the relative inpatient costs of hospital-acquired conditions. Methods: Patient level costs were estimated using computerized costing systems that log individual utilization of inpatient services and apply sophisticated cost estimates from the hospital's general ledger. Occurrence of hospital-acquired conditions was identified using an Australian ‘condition-onset' flag for diagnoses not present on admission. These were grouped to yield a comprehensive set of 144 categories of hospital-acquired conditions to summarize data coded with ICD-10. Standard linear regression techniques were used to identify the independent contribution of hospital-acquired conditions to costs, taking into account the case-mix of a sample of acute inpatients (n = 1,699,997) treated in Australian public hospitals in Victoria (2005/06) and Queensland (2006/07). Results: The most costly types of complications were post-procedure endocrine/metabolic disorders, adding AU$21,827 to the cost of an episode, followed by MRSA (AU$19,881) and enterocolitis due to Clostridium difficile (AU$19,743). Aggregate costs to the system, however, were highest for septicaemia (AU$41.4 million), complications of cardiac and vascular implants other than septicaemia (AU$28.7 million), acute lower respiratory infections, including influenza and pneumonia (AU$27.8 million) and UTI (AU$24.7 million). Hospital-acquired complications are estimated to add 17.3% to treatment costs in this sample. Conclusions: Patient safety efforts frequently focus on dramatic but rare complications with very serious patient harm. Previous studies of the costs of adverse events have provided information on ‘indicators’ of safety problems rather than the full range of hospital-acquired conditions. Adding a cost dimension to priority-setting could result in changes to the focus of patient safety programmes and research. Financial information should be combined with information on patient outcomes to allow for cost-utility evaluation of future interventions.

Patient safety and the RCA: A document analysis

This research examined the function of Queensland Health's Root Cause Analysis (RCA) to improve patient safety through an investigation of patient harm events where permanent harm and preventable death, Severity Assessment Code 1, were the outcome of healthcare. Unedited and highly legislated RCAs from across Queensland Health public hospitals from 2009, 2010 and 2011 comprised the data. A document analysis revealed the RCAs opposed organisational policy and dominant theoretical directives. If we accept the prevailing assumption that patient harm is a systemic issue, then the RCA is failing to address harm events in healthcare.