Key points for patient safety in dialysis access.

For more than 15 years, patient safety has been an issue in different domains of medicine. There is evidence for this subject and also a great need for information. First, we should be familiar with the basic terminology such as the relationship between adverse events and errors, and understand the variations of error. In patient management, besides skills and knowledge (evidence-based medicine), the ability (competence) of healthcare professionals to act and react in unexpected situations is key to prevent and treat adverse events. Not only healthcare professionals should be involved in the process but also healthy people in a way that they understand and patients in a way that they are actively involved. This paper will show how a more general view of patient safety can and should be implemented in the daily work of caregivers dealing with dialysis access in different aspects. A key factor to advance in this subject is to be open-minded and sensualized for this topic. The reader should get an idea of how an institution can create a culture of safety.

Patient safety in dialysis access: education and research.

Today, a growing activity to improve patient safety in all domains of medicine is reality. This chapter deals with patient safety research in general, but is also about strategies to implement this evidence in the daily clinical work treating patients on dialysis. Good clinical research practice has been well established for some years. In the domain of dialysis access, further basic, clinical, epidemiological and health service research will be important to further improve patient safety as a whole.

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

Taking up national safety alerts to improve patient safety in hospitals: The perspective of healthcare quality and risk managers.

BACKGROUND National safety alert systems publish relevant information to improve patient safety in hospitals. However, the information has to be transformed into local action to have an effect on patient safety. We studied three research questions: How do Swiss healthcare quality and risk managers (qm/rm(1)) see their own role in learning from safety alerts issued by the Swiss national voluntary reporting and analysis system? What are their attitudes towards and evaluations of the alerts, and which types of improvement actions were fostered by the safety alerts? METHODS A survey was developed and applied to Swiss healthcare risk and quality managers, with a response rate of 39 % (n=116). Descriptive statistics are presented. RESULTS The qm/rm disseminate and communicate with a broad variety of professional groups about the alerts. While most respondents felt that they should know the alerts and their contents, only a part of them felt responsible for driving organizational change based on the recommendations. However, most respondents used safety alerts to back up their own patient safety goals. The alerts were evaluated positively on various dimensions such as usefulness and were considered as standards of good practice by the majority of the respondents. A range of organizational responses was applied, with disseminating information being the most common. An active role is related to using safety alerts for backing up own patient safety goals. CONCLUSIONS To support an active role of qm/rm in their hospital's learning from safety alerts, appropriate organizational structures should be developed. Furthermore, they could be given special information or training to act as an information hub on the issues discussed in the alerts.

UHC Patient Safety Net® Progress To Date : An “A+” Report Card for JDH Staff!

Safety in Numbers It’s been eight months since we implemented UHC Patient Safety Net® (“PSN”) at John Dempsey Hospital, and we are delighted with its success. As you know, PSN is a web-based reporting tool for reporting patient safety-related events. Frontline staff are doing a great job entering data on patient care events. Here’s how PSN works:

Patient Safety Net Update

It’s been three months since we’ve gone live with Patient Safety Net, and it has been a great success! Managers and front line staff have been trained on how to input, review, and submit event reports that formerly were detailed on the hard copy “RIR” forms. Utilization of the webbased PSN system has been better than expected. PSN has enabled us to greatly improve the way we document and react to patient safety related events.

Patient Safety Alert : A new way to share patient safety information among departments and units

Communication : If there is one topic that comes up over and over again as we discuss ways to make John Dempsey Hospital the safest hospital, it is “communication.” In fact, several of the 2006 and 2007 National Patient Safety Goals are centered around improving the effectiveness of communication among caregivers. There are many ways of doing this, and we have implemented several already. These include handoffs, medication reconciliation, “SBAR,” etc. On page two, we will talk in more detail about hand-offs and the use of “SBAR.”

The movement toward patient safety: State action related to reporting and disclosure of healthcare-associated infections

Increasing attention has been given to the problem of medical errors over the past decade. Included within that focused attention has been a strong interest in reducing the occurrence of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). Acting concurrently with federal initiatives, the majority of U.S. states have statutorily required reporting and public disclosure of HAI data. Although the occurrence of these state statutory enactments and other state initiatives represent a recognition of the strong concern pertaining to HAIs, vast differences in each state’s HAI reporting and public disclosure requirements creates a varied and unequal response to what has become a national problem.^ The purpose of this research was to explore the variations in state HAI legal requirements and other state mandates. State actions, including statutory enactments, regulations, and other initiatives related to state reporting and public disclosure mechanisms were compared, discussed, and analyzed in an effort to illustrate the impact of the lack of uniformity as a public health concern.^ The HAI statutes, administrative requirements, and other mandates of each state and two U.S. territories were reviewed to answer the following seven research questions: How far has the state progressed in its HAI initiative? If the state has a HAI reporting requirement, is it mandatory or voluntary? What healthcare entities are subject to the reporting requirements? What data collection system is utilized? What measures are required to be reported? What is the public disclosure mechanism? How is the underlying reported information protected from public disclosure or other legal release?^ Secondary publicly available data, including state statutes, administrative rules, and other initiatives, were utilized to examine the current HAI-related legislative and administrative activity of the study subjects. The information was reviewed and analyzed to determine variations in HAI reporting and public disclosure laws. Particular attention was given to the seven key research questions.^ The research revealed that considerable progress has been achieved in state HAI initiatives since 2004. Despite this progress, however, when reviewing the state laws and HAI programs comparatively, considerable variations were found to exist with regards to the type of reporting requirements, healthcare facilities subject to the reporting laws, data collection systems utilized, reportable measures, public disclosure requirements, and confidentiality and privilege provisions. The wide variations in state statutes, administrative rules, and other agency directives create a fragmented and inconsistent approach to addressing the nationwide occurrence of HAIs in the U.S. healthcare system. ^

The relationship between surgical residents' perception of leadership and patient safety culture

Introduction. Patient safety culture is the integration of interrelated practices that once developed is supported by both the culture and leadership of the organization (Sagan, 1993). The purpose of this study is to describe and examine the relationship between surgical residents’ perception of their leadership and the resulting organizational safety culture within their clinical setting. This assessment is important to understanding the extent that leadership style affects the perception of the safety culture.^ Methods. A secondary dataset was used which included data from 68 surgical residents from two survey instruments, Organizational Description Questionnaire (ODQ) and Patient Safety Climate In Healthcare Organizations (PSCHO) Survey. Multiple regressions followed by hierarchical regressions with the introduction of the Post Graduate Year (PGY) variable examined the association between the leadership styles, Transactional and Transformational and the organizational safety culture variables, Overall Emphasis on Safety, Senior management engagement, Organizational resources for safety. Independent t-tests were conducted to assess whether males and females differ among the organizational safety culture variables and either leadership style.^ Results. The surgical residents perceived their organizational leadership to have greater emphasis placed on transformational leadership culture style relative to transactional leadership culture style. The only significant association found was between Transformational leadership and Organizational resources for safety. PGY had no significant effect on the leadership or the safety culture perceived. No significant difference was found between females and males in regards to the safety culture or the leadership style.^ Discussion. These results have implications as they support the premise for the study which is surgical residents perceive their existing leadership and organizational culture to be more transformational in nature than transactional. Significance was found between the leadership perceived and one of the safety culture variables, Organizational resources for safety. The foundation for this association lies in the fact that surgical residents are the personnel which are a part of the organizational resources. Although PGY differentiation did not seem to play a difference in the leadership perceived this could be attributed to the small sample size. No gender difference were found which supports the assumption that within such a highly specialized group such as surgical residents there is no gender differences since the highly specialized field draws a certain type of person with distinct characteristics. In future research these survey tools can be used to gauge the survey audiences’ perception and safety interventions can be developed based on the results. ^

Patient safety in the operating room and documentary quality related to infection and hospitalization

Objective: To describe the documentary quality of two records related to patient safety in the operating room and to identify differences between information related to infection and hospitalization. Methods: Comparative study based on two cross sections, conducted with 3,033 patients who had been hospitalized for more than 24 hours in an Orthopedics and Traumatology Center. Sociodemographic and clinical data, as well as information provided in forms were compared. Postoperative infection was identified as an adverse event. Results: There was a significant correlation between hospitalization days and the total number of diagnoses collected (Pearson=0.328; p<0.001). When diagnoses and infections were grouped together, a significant value was found between closed fractures and infection (p=0.001). Conclusion: Differences in the degree of completion were observed between the two records. There were no differences between adverse events.