The Well-Defined Pediatric ICU: Active Surveillance Using Nonmedical Personnel to Capture Less Serious Safety Events

Incidence and nature of adverse drug events in paediatric intensive care units: A prospective multicentre study

AIMS

The aim of this study was to assess the incidence, nature, preventability and severity of adverse drug events (ADEs) across three paediatric intensive care units (PICUs) in England.

METHODS

A prospective observational cohort study was conducted across three PICUs over a three-month period during 2019. Included patients were aged ≤18 years and stayed in PICU for a minimum of 24 hours. Identification of suspected ADEs was performed by trained PICU pharmacists. A multidisciplinary expert panel assessed causality, preventability and severity of events.

RESULTS

A total of 302 patients were included and 62 ADEs were confirmed (definite/probable causality). One in six patients experienced one or more ADEs. The estimated incidence of ADEs were 20.5 per 100 patients (95% CI 15.3-27.5) and 16.7 per 1000 patient-days (95% CI 9.3-29.9). The majority of ADEs were judged preventable by the expert panel (36/62, 58.1%). ADEs were commonly involved with medicines prescribing (29/62, 46.8%) and caused temporary patient harm (42/62, 67.7%). Medications for the central nervous system (14/62, 22.6%), infections (13/62, 20.9%) and cardiovascular system (12/62, 19.4%) were commonly implicated with ADEs. Multivariable analysis revealed that patients who stayed in PICU for ≥7 days (OR 6.29, 95% CI 2.42-16.32) were more likely to experience an ADE compared to patients with a stay of 1-6 days.

CONCLUSION

ADEs are common in English PICUs and most of them may be preventable. There is a strong association between ADE occurrence and duration of PICU stay, which represents a target for remedial interventions. Exploring contributory factors of preventable ADEs is now necessary to inform preventive policies.

Translating staff experience into organisational improvement: the HEADS-UP stepped wedge, cluster controlled, non-randomised trial

OBJECTIVES

Frontline insights into care delivery correlate with patients' clinical outcomes. These outcomes might be improved through near-real time identification and mitigation of staff concerns. We evaluated the effects of a prospective frontline surveillance system on patient and team outcomes.

DESIGN

Prospective, stepped wedge, non-randomised, cluster controlled trial; prespecified per protocol analysis for high-fidelity intervention delivery.

PARTICIPANTS

Seven interdisciplinary medical ward teams from two hospitals in the UK.

INTERVENTION

Prospective clinical team surveillance (PCTS): structured daily interdisciplinary briefings to capture staff concerns, with organisational facilitation and feedback.

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome was excess length of stay (eLOS): an admission more than 24 hours above the local average for comparable patients. Secondary outcomes included safety and teamwork climates, and incident reporting. Mixed-effects models adjusted for time effects, age, comorbidity, palliation status and ward admissions. Safety and teamwork climates were measured with the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire. High-fidelity PCTS delivery comprised high engagement and high briefing frequency.

RESULTS

Implementation fidelity was variable, both in briefing frequency (median 80% working days/month, IQR 65%-90%) and engagement (median 70 issues/ward/month, IQR 34-113). 1714/6518 (26.3%) intervention admissions had eLOS versus 1279/4927 (26.0%) control admissions, an absolute risk increase of 0.3%. PCTS increased eLOS in the adjusted intention-to-treat model (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.58, p=0.003). Conversely, high-fidelity PCTS reduced eLOS (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.94, p=0.006). High-fidelity PCTS also increased total, high-yield and non-nurse incident reports (incidence rate ratios 1.28-1.79, all p<0.002). Sustained PCTS significantly improved safety and teamwork climates over time.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlighted the potential benefits and pitfalls of ward-level interdisciplinary interventions. While these interventions can improve care delivery in complex, fluid environments, the manner of their implementation is paramount. Suboptimal implementation may have an unexpectedly negative impact on performance.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN 34806867 (http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN34806867).

Translating concerns into action: a detailed qualitative evaluation of an interdisciplinary intervention on medical wards

OBJECTIVES

To understand how frontline reports of day-to-day care failings might be better translated into improvement.

DESIGN

Qualitative evaluation of an interdisciplinary team intervention capitalising on the frontline experience of care delivery. Prospective clinical team surveillance (PCTS) involved structured interdisciplinary briefings to capture challenges in care delivery, facilitated organisational escalation of the issues they identified, and feedback. Eighteen months of ethnography and two focus groups were conducted with staff taking part in a trial of PCTS.

RESULTS

PCTS fostered psychological safety-a confidence that the team would not embarrass or punish those who speak up. This was complemented by a hard edge of accountability, whereby team members would regulate their own behaviour in anticipation of future briefings. Frontline concerns were triaged to managers, or resolved autonomously by ward teams, reversing what had been well-established normalisations of deviance. Junior clinicians found a degree of catharsis in airing their concerns, and their teams became more proactive in addressing improvement opportunities. PCTS generated tangible organisational changes, and enabled managers to make a convincing case for investment. However, briefings were constrained by the need to preserve professional credibility, and staff found some comfort in avoiding accountability . At higher organisational levels, frontline concerns were subject to competition with other priorities, and their resolution was limited by the scale of the challenges they described.

CONCLUSIONS

Prospective safety strategies relying on staff-volunteered data produce acceptable, negotiated accounts, subject to the many interdisciplinary tensions that characterise ward work. Nonetheless, these strategies give managers access to the realities of frontline cares, and support frontline staff to make incremental changes in their daily work. These are goals for learning healthcare organisations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN 34806867.