What is the role of individual accountability in patient safety? A multi-site ethnographic study

Locum doctor working and quality and safety: a qualitative study in English primary and secondary care

BACKGROUND

The use of temporary doctors, known as locums, has been common practice for managing staffing shortages and maintaining service delivery internationally. However, there has been little empirical research on the implications of locum working for quality and safety. This study aimed to investigate the implications of locum working for quality and safety.

METHODS

Qualitative semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted with 130 participants, including locums, patients, permanently employed doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals with governance and recruitment responsibilities for locums across primary and secondary healthcare organisations in the English NHS. Data were collected between March 2021 and April 2022. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and abductive analysis.

RESULTS

Participants described the implications of locum working for quality and safety across five themes: (1) 'familiarity' with an organisation and its patients and staff was essential to delivering safe care; (2) 'balance and stability' of services reliant on locums were seen as at risk of destabilisation and lacking leadership for quality improvement; (3) 'discrimination and exclusion' experienced by locums had negative implications for morale, retention and patient outcomes; (4) 'defensive practice' by locums as a result of perceptions of increased vulnerability and decreased support; (5) clinical governance arrangements, which often did not adequately cover locum doctors.

CONCLUSION

Locum working and how locums were integrated into organisations posed some significant challenges and opportunities for patient safety and quality of care. Organisations should take stock of how they work with the locum workforce to improve not only quality and safety but also locum experience and retention.

Designing a learning tool for translating resilience in healthcare into practice: A qualitative mixed methods study

There is currently a lack of tools that focus on strengthening resilient performance of healthcare systems through learning from positive healthcare events. Such tools are needed to operationalize and translate resilience in healthcare and, thus, advance the field of patient safety by learning from both positive and negative events and outcomes. The purpose of this study is to describe the developmental process of one such tool to enable operationalization of resilient healthcare and aid future tool development. The development process featured a complex, multi-step, design through involvement of a range of different stakeholders. A combination of publicly available platforms, cross-sectional knowledge, step-by step instructions and a learning tool that engages participants in collaborative practice to facilitate discussions across stakeholders and system levels is proposed as a means to create awareness of when and what contributes to resilient performance is fundamental to understanding and improving healthcare system resilience.

A realist synthesis of multicentre comparative audit implementation: exploring what works and in which healthcare contexts

BACKGROUND

Multicentre comparative clinical audits have the potential to improve patient care, allow benchmarking and inform resource allocation. However, implementing effective and sustainable large-scale audit can be difficult within busy and resource-constrained contemporary healthcare settings. There are little data on what facilitates the successful implementation of multicentre audits. As healthcare environments are complex sociocultural organisational environments, implementing multicentre audits within them is likely to be highly context dependent.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to examine factors that were influential in the implementation process of multicentre comparative audits within healthcare contexts-what worked, why, how and for whom?

METHODS

A realist review was conducted in accordance with the Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards reporting standards. A preliminary programme theory informed two systematic literature searches of peer-reviewed and grey literature. The main context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations underlying the implementation processes of multicentre audits were identified and formed a final programme theory.

RESULTS

69 original articles were included in the realist synthesis. Four discrete CMO configurations were deduced from this synthesis, which together made up the final programme theory. These were: (1) generating trustworthy data; (2) encouraging audit participation; (3) ensuring audit sustainability; and (4) facilitating audit cycle completion.

CONCLUSIONS

This study elucidated contexts, mechanisms and outcomes influential to the implementation processes of multicentre or national comparative audits in healthcare. The relevance of these contextual factors and generative mechanisms were supported by established theories of behaviour and findings from previous empirical research. These findings highlight the importance of balancing reliability with pragmatism within complex adaptive systems, generating and protecting human capital, ensuring fair and credible leadership and prioritising change facilitation.

Ethical challenges experienced by veterinary practitioners in relation to adverse events: Insights from a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Understanding ethical challenges experienced in relation to adverse events is necessary to inform strategies that optimise patient safety and practitioner wellbeing.

METHODS

A qualitative exploration of UK veterinary practitioners' experiences of adverse events was conducted. Data were collected via 12 focus groups and 20 interviews and analysed using an inductive coding technique.

RESULTS

Questions surrounding acceptable boundaries of care, decision-making autonomy, personal scope of practice, use of evidence and speaking up about patient safety concerns were identified as ethically challenging to practitioners when endeavouring to prevent adverse events. Issues of appropriate accountability, interaction and communication with animal owners and the prioritisation of emotional and technical support for themselves and others were identified as ethically challenging in the aftermath of adverse events.

LIMITATIONS

The qualitative nature of this study limits the generalisability of the findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Ethical challenges are experienced by veterinary practitioners in relation to both preventing and responding in the aftermath of adverse events. Strategies that facilitate ethical decision making and reflection and encourage openness and learning from adverse events would likely improve patient safety and enhance practitioner wellbeing. Further research is needed to develop and implement support for practitioners who experience ethical challenges in relation to adverse events.

Doing primary care integration: a qualitative study of meso-level collaborative practices

BACKGROUND

The integration of Primary Care (PC) into broader health systems has been a goal in jurisdictions around the world. Efforts to achieve integration at the meso-level have drawn particular attention, but there are few actionable recommendations for how to enact a 'pro-integration culture' amongst government and PC governance bodies. This paper describes pragmatic integration activity undertaken by meso-level participants in Alberta, Canada, and suggests ways this activity may be generalizable to other health systems.

METHODS

11 semi-structured interviews with nine key informants from meso-level organizations were selected from a larger qualitative study examining healthcare policy development and implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Selected interviews focused on participants' experiences and efforts to 'do' integration as they responded to Alberta's first wave of the Omicron variant in September 2021. An interpretive descriptive approach was used to identify repeating cycles in the integration context, and pragmatic integration activities.

RESULTS

As Omicron arrived in Alberta, integration and relations between meso-level PC and central health system participants were tense, but efforts to improve the situation were successfully made. In this context of cycling relationships, staffing changes made in reaction to exogenous shocks and political pressures were clear influences on integration. However, participants also engaged in specific behaviours that advanced a pro-integration culture. They did so by: signaling value through staffing and resource choices; speaking and enacting personal and group commitments to collaboration; persevering; and practicing bi-directional communication through formal and informal channels.

CONCLUSIONS

Achieving PC integration involves not just the reactive work of responding to exogenous factors, but also the proactive work of enacting cultural, relationship, and communication behaviors. These behaviors may support integration regardless of the shocks, staff turnover, and relational freeze-thaw cycles experienced by any health system.

Radiographers' perception of patient safety culture in radiology

INTRODUCTION

Radiographers play a central role in patient safety because of their knowledge of and responsibilities in relation to the imaging process. To maintain safe care, the workplace must create a safety culture that enables sustainable safety work.

AIM

This study aims to describe radiographers' perceptions of the patient safety culture in radiology units in Sweden.

METHODS

The Swedish Hospital Survey of Patients' Safety Culture (S-HSOPSC) was used to gather descriptive data from 171 Swedish registered radiographers working in five radiology clinics distributed across 15 units. Fifty-one questionnaire items and one open-ended question were analysed, comprising perceptions of the overall safety grade, the frequency of number of reported risks and events, and 14 composites regarding patient safety dimensions.

RESULTS

The radiographers' concerns surrounding the patient safety culture in their workplaces related to weaknesses regarding the safety dimensions "Staffing", "Frequency of error reporting", "Organizational learning - continuous improvement" and "Executive management support for patient safety". They perceived "Teamwork within the unit" to be a strength.

CONCLUSION

Despite some weaknesses in the patient safety culture, the radiographers perceived that the overall patient safety level was good, in part because of their ability to spot risks in time. The executive management, however, needed to improve their feedback on safety measures; and another reason for some weaknesses in the patient safety culture could be staffing issues such as lack of time for meetings for continuous improvement. Managers and leaders have a great responsibility to establish a patient safety culture through support and good leadership.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

An understanding of what creates a safety culture is important to prevent patient safety incidents.

Accountability as a virtue in medicine: from theory to practice

Accountability is a norm basic to several aspects of medical practice. We explore here the benefits of a more explicit focus on the virtue of accountability, which as distinct from the state of being held accountable, entails both welcoming responsibility to others and welcoming input from others. Practicing accountably can limit moral distress caused by institutional pressures on the doctor patient relationship. Fostering a mindset that is welcoming rather than resistant to feedback is critical to enhancing a culture of learning. Analysis of failures of accountable practice offers opportunities for improving the delivery of clinical care.

Effecting change and improving practice in a regional Emergency Department: A Mental Health Nurse Practitioner's perspective

Providing appropriate, timely intervention and care to people who present with mental health issues to an Emergency Department presents unique ongoing challenges, often affecting patient experiences and outcomes. To address such concerns, a Mental Health Liaison Nurse role, led by a Mental Health Nurse Practitioner, was introduced to a regional Emergency Department. This role provided integrated emergency-based mental health clinical practice, with positive findings reported in a recently published multi-site translational research project. With sound quantitative and qualitative evidence detailing the benefits of this role, the experiential perspective from a clinician working in this frontline space further confirms the importance of having access to such a position in leading cultural and systemic change. This discussion article identifies key processes that align current research with the clinical perspective. Such processes recognize the challenges of implementing a new role and moving forward from these to embed consistent clinical practices. The need to build sound internal and external stakeholder partnerships, effect change implementation, and assign recommendations to ensure sustainability of improved practice and processes are highlighted in this paper. This article is, therefore, designed to assist other advanced practice nurses, who may be embarking on a similar journey and want to influence organizational policy and practice.

A content analysis of contributory factors reported in serious incident investigation reports in hospital care

BACKGROUND

Serious incident (SI) investigations aim to identify factors that caused or could have caused serious patient harm. This study aimed to use the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) to characterise the contributory factors identified in SI investigation reports.

METHODS

We performed a content analysis of 126 investigation reports from a multi-site NHS trust. We used a HFACS-based framework that was modified through inductive analysis of the data.

RESULTS

Using the modified HFACS framework, 'unsafe actions' were the most commonly identified hierarchical level of contributory factors in investigation reports, which were identified 282 times across 99 (79%) incidents. 'Preconditions to unsafe acts' (identified 223 times in 91 (72%) incidents) included miscommunication and environmental factors. Supervisory factors were identified 73 times across 40 (31%) incidents, and organisational factors 115 times across 59 (47%) incidents. We identified 'extra-organisational factors' as a new HFACS level, though it was infrequently described.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of SI investigation reports using a modified HFACS framework allows important insights into what investigators view as contributory factors. We found an emphasis on human error but little engagement with why it occurs. Better investigations will require independence and professionalisation of investigators, human factors expertise, and a systems approach.

Organizational Factors That Promote Error Reporting in Healthcare: A Scoping Review

GOAL

The overarching aim of this systematic review was to offer guidelines for organizations and healthcare providers to create psychological safety in error reporting. The authors wanted to identify organizational factors that promote psychological safety for error reporting and identify gaps in the literature to explore innovative avenues for future research.

METHODS

The authors conducted an online search of peer-reviewed articles that contain organizational processes promoting or preventing error reporting. The search yielded 420 articles published from 2015 to 2021. From this set, 52 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Data from 29 articles were evaluated for quality using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We present a narrative review of the 29 studies that reported factors either promoting error reporting or serving as barriers. We also present our findings in tables to highlight the most frequently reported themes. Our findings reveal that many healthcare organizations work at opposite ends of the process continuum to achieve the same goals. Finally, our results highlight the need to explore cultural differences and personal biases among both healthcare leaders and clinicians.

APPLICATIONS TO PRACTICE

The findings underscore the need for a deeper dive into understanding error reporting from the perspective of individual characteristics and organizational interests toward increasing psychological safety in healthcare teams and the workplace to strengthen patient safety.

Striving for high reliability in healthcare: a qualitative study of the implementation of a hospital safety programme

BACKGROUND

Healthcare leaders look to high-reliability organisations (HROs) for strategies to improve safety, despite questions about how to translate these strategies into practice. Weick and Sutcliffe describe five principles exhibited by HROs. Interventions aiming to foster these principles are common in healthcare; however, there have been few examinations of the perceptions of those who have planned or experienced these efforts.

OBJECTIVE

This single-site qualitative study explores how healthcare professionals understand and enact the HRO principles in response to an HRO-inspired hospital-wide safety programme.

METHODS

We interviewed 71 participants representing hospital executives, programme leadership, and staff and physicians from three clinical services. We observed and collected data from unit and hospital-wide quality and safety meetings and activities. We used thematic analysis to code and analyse the data.

RESULTS

Participants reported enactment of the HRO principles 'preoccupation with failure', 'reluctance to simplify interpretations' and 'sensitivity to operations', and described the programme as adding legitimacy, training, and support. However, the programme was more often targeted at, and taken up by, nurses compared with other groups. Participants were less able to identify interventions that supported the HRO principles 'commitment to resilience' and 'deference to expertise' and reported limited examples of changes in practices related to these principles. Moreover, we identified inconsistent, and even conflicting, understanding of concepts related to the HRO principles, often related to social and professional norms and practices. Finally, an individualised rather than systemic approach hindered collective actions underlying high reliability.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that the safety programme supported some HRO principles more than others, and was targeted at, and perceived differently across professional groups leading to inconsistent understanding and enactments of the principles across the organisation. Combining HRO-inspired interventions with more targeted attention to each of the HRO principles could produce greater, more consistent high-reliability practices.

The status and the factors that influence patient safety in health care institutions in Africa: A systematic review

Poor patient safety practices may result in disability, injury, poor prognosis, or even death and are primarily associated with a common concern in Africa. This study synthesized the factors influencing the maintenance of patient safety in Africa's healthcare institutions. There was an in-depth search in PubMed Central, CINAHL, Cochrane library, web of science, and Embase using the PICO framework. The search results were filtered for Africa and from 2011 to September 2021 to yield 9,656 titles after duplicates were removed using endnote software, and 211 titles were selected for full-text reading as 16 were selected based on predetermined criteria. The quality appraisal was done using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A matrix was developed, discussed, accepted, and used as a guide for the data extraction. A convergent synthesis design was adopted for data analysis as the data was transformed into qualitative descriptive statements. Patient safety ratings ranged from 12.4% to 44.8% as being good. Patient safety was identified as an essential structure to improve patient outcomes. The factors associated with patient safety were level of education, professional category, hours worked per week, participation in a patient safety program, reporting of adverse events, openness in communication, organizational learning, teamwork, physical space environment, exchange of feedback about error, and support by hospital management. Poor patient safety environment could lead to the staff being prosecuted or imprisoned, lack of respect and confidence by colleagues, embarrassment, loss of confidence and trust in the health team by patients, documentation errors, drug errors, blood transfusion-related incidences, development of bedsores, and disability. These strategies by health institutions to promote patient safety must focus on reducing punitive culture, creating a culture of open communication, and encouraging incidence reporting and investigations to ensure continuous learning among all health care professionals.

How Can Implementation of a Large-Scale Patient Safety Program Strengthen Hospital Safety Culture? Lessons From a Qualitative Study of National Patient Safety Program Implementation in Two Public Hospitals in Brazil

Large-scale (e.g., national) programs could strengthen safety culture, which is foundational to patient safety, yet we know little about how to optimize this potential. In 2013, Brazil's Ministry of Health launched the National Patient Safety Program, involving hospital-level safety teams and targeted safety protocols. We conducted in-depth qualitative case studies of National Patient Safety Program implementation in two hospitals, with different readiness, to understand how program implementation affected enabling, enacting, and elaborating processes that produce and sustain safety culture. For both hospitals, external mandates were insufficient for enabling hospital-level action. Internal enabling failures (e.g., little safety-relevant senior leadership) hindered enactment (e.g., safety teams unable to institute plans). Limited enactment and weak elaboration processes (e.g., bureaucratic monitoring) failed to institutionalize protocol use and undermined safety culture. Optimizing the safety culture impact of large-scale programs requires effective multi-level enabling and capitalizing on the productive potential of interacting national- and local-level influences.

Graduate nurse views on patient safety: Navigating challenging workplace interactions with senior clinical nurses

AIM AND OBJECTIVE

To explore and understand the negative experiences of graduate nurses' interaction with senior nurses and the implications for safe patient care.

BACKGROUND

Patient safety is dependent on the nursing care they receive. Working in environments where there is reduced collegial support and increased emotional distress, increases the likelihood of nurses making errors that may negatively impact on patient outcomes. Insights drawn from graduate nurses' negative interactions with senior nurses may provide an understanding of the impact of nurse-to-nurse interactions on patient safety outcomes.

METHODS

A qualitative exploratory descriptive design was used. A purposive sample of 18 graduate registered nurses participated in this study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were thematically analysed. The COREQ checklist was followed.

RESULTS

The overarching theme, 'Navigating workplace challenges' was identified with two sub-themes: Processing unsupportive nurse behaviour and responding to nurse deviations from best practice. Common deviations in practice included erosion of safe medication practice, wound care and non-compliance with universal precautions. Graduate nurses also observed unsafe workplace practice, however, were hesitant to speak up due to fear of retribution. Unsupportive behaviours impacted on their critical thinking ability, follow-up interactions with other nurses and subsequent delivery of patient care.

CONCLUSION

Quality and safety strategies should not ignore and/or overlook the impact of interpersonal relationships on patient safety and risk. Strategies for delivering evidence-based, safe and quality care to patients go beyond the establishment of standards and technically focussed management strategies.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

It is vital to examine the quality of working relationships between all levels of healthcare professionals including graduate nurses and their supervisors to ensure supportive behaviours prevail in advancing delivery of quality care within the practice environment. The study alludes to the fact that disruptive workplace behaviours are more hierarchical than horizontal (i.e., graduate nurse-to-graduate nurse).

Health system responsiveness in Iran: a cross-sectional study in hospitals of Mazandaran province

Purpose

Responsiveness is a reaction to the reasonable expectations of patients regarding ethical and non-clinical aspects of the health-care system. Responsiveness is a characteristic of health-care system and the observance of the patient’s rights. The purpose of this study is to compare the responsiveness of the health-care system based on the hospital ownership in Mazandaran province in Iran.

Design/methodology/approach

The cross-sectional study design was used on 1,083 patients referred to public and private hospitals and hospitals affiliated to social security organization in Mazandaran province in 2017. The World Health Organization’s responsibility questionnaire was used to collect data. Data were analyzed by using SPSS version 21. Descriptive statistics and one-way ANOVA results are presented is the results section.

Findings

All responsiveness dimensions were salient for respondents. The response rate in the selected hospitals was very close, which ranged from 85.7 to 90.2%, and there was no significant difference between public, private and social security hospitals (p > 0.05). The most crucial responsiveness dimension in hospitals was autonomy.

Originality/value

In the current study, the dimensions of communication and confidentiality were identified as priority dimensions based on the least score for breeding actions to improve the responsiveness of the health-care system. At the end, some useful recommendations such as re-engineering the processes, training to engage the employees with patients and encouraging them to fill the gap were suggested.

Rapid conversion of an in-patient hospital unit to accommodate COVID-19: An interdisciplinary human factors, ethnography, and infection prevention and control approach

BACKGROUND

In response to the Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, in-patient units in hospitals around the world have altered their patient care routines and Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) practices. Our interdisciplinary team of applied Human Factors (HF), ethnography, and IPC experts assisted one Unit, normally serving general surgical and orthopedic patients, as it rapidly converted to deliver COVID-19-specific care. This paper describes the conversion experience of the Unit, and outlines broader lessons for other acute care teams faced with similar issues.

METHODS

We deployed walkthroughs, simulations, and ethnography to identify important safety gaps in care delivery processes on the Unit. These interventions were undertaken using interdisciplinary theories of implementation that combined systems-level HF perspectives, ethnographic approaches, and individual-level IPC perspectives. Timely recommendations were developed and delivered to Unit staff for feedback and implementation.

RESULTS

We describe three interventions on the Unit: 1) the de-cluttering and re-organization of personal protective equipment (PPE); 2) the reconfiguring of designated 'dirty' tray tables and supplies; and 3) the redesign of handling pathways for 'dirty' linens and laundry. Each of these interventions was implemented to varying degrees, but all contributed to discussions of safety and IPC implementation that extended beyond the Unit and into the operations of the broader hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

Leveraging our team's interdisciplinary expertise and blended approaches to implementation, the interventions assisted in the Unit's rapid conversion towards providing COVID-19-specific care. The deployment and implementation of the interventions highlight the potential of collaboration between HF, ethnography, and IPC experts to support frontline healthcare delivery under pandemic conditions in an effort to minimize nosocomial transmission potential in the acute healthcare setting.

Is the 'never event' concept a useful safety management strategy in complex primary healthcare systems?

WHY IS THE AREA IMPORTANT?

A sub-group of rare but serious patient safety incidents, known as 'never events,' is judged to be 'avoidable.' There is growing interest in this concept in international care settings, including UK primary care. However, issues have been raised regarding the well-intentioned coupling of 'preventable harm' with zero tolerance 'never events,' especially around the lack of evidence for such harm ever being totally preventable.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN AND GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE?

We consider whether the ideal of reducing preventable harm to 'never' is better for patient safety than, for example, the goal of managing risk materializing into harm to 'as low as reasonably practicable,' which is well-established in other complex socio-technical systems and is demonstrably achievable.We reflect on the 'never event' concept in the primary care context specifically, although the issues and the polarized opinion highlighted are widely applicable. Recent developments to validate primary care 'never event' lists are summarized and alternative safety management strategies considered, e.g. Safety-I and Safety-II.

FUTURE AREAS FOR ADVANCING RESEARCH AND PRACTICE

Despite their rarity, if there is to be a policy focus on 'never events,' then specialist training for key workforce members is necessary to enable examination of the complex system interactions and design issues, which contribute to such events. The 'never event' term is well intentioned but largely aspirational-however, it is important to question prevailing assumptions about how patient safety can be understood and improved by offering alternative ways of thinking about related complexities.

Perceptions and experiences of frontline health managers and providers on accountability in a South African health district

Objective

Public primary health care and district health systems play important roles in expanding healthcare access and promoting equity. This study explored and described accountability for this mandate as perceived and experienced by frontline health managers and providers involved in delivering maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) services in a rural South African health district.

Methods

This was a qualitative study involving in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of 58 frontline public sector health managers and providers in the district office and two sub-districts, examining the meanings of accountability and related lived experiences. A thematic analysis approach grounded in descriptive phenomenology was used to identify the main themes and organise the findings.

Results

Accountability was described by respondents as both an organisational mechanism of answerability and responsibility and an intrinsic professional virtue. Accountability relationships were understood to be multidirectional - upwards and downwards in hierarchies, outwards to patients and communities, and inwards to the ‘self’. The practice of accountability was seen as constrained by organisational environments where impunity and unfair punishment existed alongside each other, where political connections limited the ability to sanction and by climates of fear and blame. Accountability was seen as enabled by open management styles, teamwork, good relationships between primary health care, hospital services and communities, investment in knowledge and skills development and responsive support systems. The interplay of these constraints and enablers varied across the facilities and sub-districts studied.

Conclusions

Providers and managers have well-established ideas about, and a language of, accountability. The lived reality of accountability by frontline managers and providers varies and is shaped by micro-configurations of enablers and constraints in local accountability ecosystems. A ‘just culture’, teamwork and collaboration between primary health care and hospitals and community participation were seen as promoting accountability, enabling collective responsibility, a culture of learning rather than blame, and ultimately, access to and quality of care.

Second victim phenomenon: Is 'just culture' a reality? An integrative review

BACKGROUND

Despite rigorous and multiple attempts to establish a culture of patient safety and a goal to decrease incidence of patient deaths in the health care, estimations of preventable mortality due to medical errors varied widely from 44,000 to 250,000 in hospital settings. This magnitude of medical errors establishes patient safety as being at the forefront of public concerns, healthcare practice and research. In addition to the potential negative impact on patients and the healthcare system, medical errors evoke intense psychological responses in health care providers' responses that threaten their personal and professional selves, and their ability to deliver high quality patient care. Studies show half of all hospital providers will suffer from second victim phenomena at least once in their careers. Health care institutions have begun a paradigm shift from blame to fairness, referred to as 'just culture'. 'Just culture' better ensures that a balanced, responsible approach for both providers who err and healthcare organizations in which they practice, and shifts the focus to designing improved systems in the workplace.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to identify: how medical errors affect health care professionals, as second victims; and how health care organizations can make 'just culture' a reality.

DESIGN

An integrative review was performed using a methodical three-step search on the concept of second victims' perceptions and responses, as well as 'just culture' of health care institutions.

RESULTS

A total of 42 research studies were identified involving health care professionals: 10 qualitative studies; eight mixed-method studies; and 24 quantitative studies. Second victims' perceptions of the current 'just culture' included: 1) fear of repercussions of reporting medical errors as a barrier; 2) supportive safety leadership is central to reducing fear of error reporting; 3) improved education on adverse event reporting, developing positive feedback when adverse events are reported, and the development of non-punitive error guidelines for health care professionals are needed; and 4) the need for development of standard operating procedures for health care facility peer-support teams.

CONCLUSIONS

Second victims' perceptions of organizational and peer support are a part of 'just culture'. Enhanced support for second victims may improve the quality of health care, strengthen the emotional support of the health care professionals, and build relationships between health care institutions and staff. Although some programs are in place in health care institutions to support 'just culture' and second victims, more comprehensive programs are needed.

Making body work sequences visible: an ethnographic study of acute orthopaedic hospital wards

Within health and social care, academic attention is increasingly paid to understanding the nature and centrality of body work. Relatively little is known about how and where body work specifically fits into the wider work relations that produce it in healthcare settings. We draw on ethnographic observations of staff practice in three National Health Service acute hospital wards in the United Kingdom to make visible the micro-processes of patient care sequences including both body work and the work contextualising and supporting it. Our data, produced in 2015, show body work interactions in acute care to be critically embedded within a context of initiating, preparing, moving and restoring and proceeding. Shades of privacy and objectification of the body are present throughout these sequences. While accomplishing tasks away from the physical body, staff members must also maintain physical and cognitive work focussed on producing body work. Thus, patient care is necessarily complex, requiring much staff time and energy to deliver it. We argue that by making visible the micro-processes that hospital patient care depends on, including both body work and the work sequences supporting it, the complex physical and cognitive workload required to deliver care can be better recognised. (A virtual version of this abstract is available at: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_979cmCmR9rLrKuD7z0ycA).

Accountability issues in an English emergency department: A nursing perspective

INTRODUCTION

Nurses confront doubts about their accountability and how it affects their clinical practice daily in the complex environment of an emergency department. Therefore, nurses' experiences can provide vital information about the decisions and dilemmas in clinical practice that affect both healthcare professionals and patients alike.

AIM

The aim of this study was to explore the perceptions of nursing staff in an English emergency department in relation to their ethical, legal and professional accountability.

METHODS

Ethnographic content analysis was used to analyse 34 semi-structured interviews from registered nurses working in an emergency department.

RESULTS

There were five categories found during the coding process: nursing care, staff interactions, legal and professional accountability, decision-making process and ethics and values.

CONCLUSION

Several issues related to nursing accountability were found, including the effects of nursing shortages and the reasoning behind multidiscipinary team conflicts. Different approaches of individual and institutional accountability, the evolution of Benner's nursing model and nursing value progression was also identified as key issues. All these phenomena affect nursing accountability in different ways, so their comprehension is paramount to understand and influence them to benefit both patients and nurses.

Nurses' Adherence to Patient Safety Principles: A Systematic Review

Background: Quality-of-care improvement and prevention of practice errors is dependent on nurses’ adherence to the principles of patient safety. Aims: This paper aims to provide a systematic review of the international literature, to synthesise knowledge and explore factors that influence nurses’ adherence to patient-safety principles. Methods: Electronic databases in English, Norwegian, and Finnish languages were searched, using appropriate keywords to retrieve empirical articles published from 2010–2019. Using the theoretical domains of the Vincent’s framework for analysing risk and safety in clinical practice, we synthesized our findings according to ‘patient’, ‘healthcare provider’, ‘task’, ‘work environment’, and ‘organisation and management’. Findings: Six articles were found that focused on adherence to patient-safety principles during clinical nursing interventions. They focused on the management of peripheral venous catheters, surgical hand rubbing instructions, double-checking policies of medicines management, nursing handover between wards, cardiac monitoring and surveillance, and care-associated infection precautions. Patients’ participation, healthcare providers’ knowledge and attitudes, collaboration by nurses, appropriate equipment and electronic systems, education and regular feedback, and standardization of the care process influenced nurses’ adherence to patient-safety principles. Conclusions: The revelation of individual and systemic factors has implications for nursing care practice, as both influence adherence to patient-safety principles. More studies using qualitative and quantitative methods are required to enhance our knowledge of measures needed to improve nurse’ adherence to patient-safety principles and their effects on patient-safety outcomes.

Clinical negligence costs: taking action to safeguard NHS sustainability

The NHS cannot afford to divert more and more money to litigation, and we need to tackle the problem at source. Tim Draycott and colleagues set out four principles to reduce avoidable harm

Pediatric Clinician Comfort Discussing Diagnostic Errors for Improving Patient Safety: A Survey

INTRODUCTION

Meaningful conversations about diagnostic errors require safety cultures where clinicians are comfortable discussing errors openly. However, clinician comfort discussing diagnostic errors publicly and barriers to these discussions remain unexplored. We compared clinicians' comfort discussing diagnostic errors to other medical errors and identified barriers to open discussion.

METHODS

Pediatric clinicians at 4 hospitals were surveyed between May and June 2018. The survey assessed respondents' comfort discussing medical errors (with varying degrees of system versus individual clinician responsibility) during morbidity and mortality conferences and privately with peers. Respondents reported the most significant barriers to discussing diagnostic errors publicly. Poststratification weighting accounted for nonresponse bias; the Benjamini-Hochberg adjustment was applied to control for false discovery (significance set at P < 0.018).

RESULTS

Clinicians (n = 838; response rate 22.6%) were significantly less comfortable discussing all error types during morbidity and mortality conferences than privately (P < 0.004) and significantly less comfortable discussing diagnostic errors compared with other medical errors (P < 0.018). Comfort did not differ by clinician type or years in practice; clinicians at one institution were significantly less comfortable discussing diagnostic errors compared with peers at other institutions. The most frequently cited barriers to discussing diagnostic errors publicly included feeling like a bad clinician, loss of reputation, and peer judgment of knowledge base and decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians are more uncomfortable discussing diagnostic errors than other types of medical errors. The most frequent barriers involve the public perception of clinical performance. Addressing this aspect of safety culture may improve clinician participation in efforts to reduce harm from diagnostic errors.

Artificial intelligence in health care: accountability and safety

The prospect of patient harm caused by the decisions made by an artificial intelligence-based clinical tool is something to which current practices of accountability and safety worldwide have not yet adjusted. We focus on two aspects of clinical artificial intelligence used for decision-making: moral accountability for harm to patients; and safety assurance to protect patients against such harm. Artificial intelligence-based tools are challenging the standard clinical practices of assigning blame and assuring safety. Human clinicians and safety engineers have weaker control over the decisions reached by artificial intelligence systems and less knowledge and understanding of precisely how the artificial intelligence systems reach their decisions. We illustrate this analysis by applying it to an example of an artificial intelligence-based system developed for use in the treatment of sepsis. The paper ends with practical suggestions for ways forward to mitigate these concerns. We argue for a need to include artificial intelligence developers and systems safety engineers in our assessments of moral accountability for patient harm. Meanwhile, none of the actors in the model robustly fulfil the traditional conditions of moral accountability for the decisions of an artificial intelligence system. We should therefore update our conceptions of moral accountability in this context. We also need to move from a static to a dynamic model of assurance, accepting that considerations of safety are not fully resolvable during the design of the artificial intelligence system before the system has been deployed.

Patient safety in medical residency training: Balancing bravery and checklists

Distributing responsibility for patient safety between individual professionals and organisational systems is a pressing issue in contemporary healthcare. This article draws on Habermas' distinction between 'lifeworld' and 'system' to explore patient-safety culture in medical residency training. Sociological accounts of medical training have indicated that applying systemic solutions in patient-safety training and practice may conflict with residents' needs. Residents would navigate safety systems to get their work done and safeguard learning opportunities, acting 'in between' the system and traditional processes of socialisation and learning on the job. Our ethnographic study reveals how residents seek to connect system and professional-based learning, and do them together in situated manners that evolve in the course of medical training. We reveal three themes that closely align with the residents' developmental process of maturing during training and on the job to become 'real' physicians: (1) coming to grips with the job; (2) working around safety procedures; and (3) moving on to independence. A more explicit focus on learning to deal with uncertainty may enable residents to become more skilled in balancing safety systems.

How to improve healthcare improvement-an essay by Mary Dixon-Woods

As improvement practice and research begin to come of age, Mary Dixon-Woods considers the key areas that need attention if we are to reap their benefits

Financialising acute kidney injury: from the practices of care to the numbers of improvement

Although sociological studies of quality and safety have identified competing epistemologies in the attempt to measure and improve care, there are gaps in our understanding of how finance and accounting practices are being used to organise this field. This analysis draws on what others have elsewhere called 'financialisation' in order to explore the quantification of qualitatively complex care practices. We make our argument using ethnographic data of a quality improvement programme for acute kidney injury (AKI) in a publicly funded hospital in England. Our study is thus concerned with tracing the effects of financialisation in the emergence and assembly of AKI as an object of concern within the hospital. We describe three linked mechanisms through which this occurs: (1) representing and intervening in kidney care; (2) making caring practices count and (3) decision-making using kidney numbers. Together these stages transform care practices first into risks and then from risks into costs. We argue that this calculative process reinforces a separation between practice and organisational decision-making made on the basis of numbers. This elevates the status of numbers while diminishing the work of practitioners and managers. We conclude by signalling possible future avenues of research that can take up these processes.

Patients' Conceptualizations of Responsibility for Healthcare: A Typology for Understanding Differing Attributions in the Context of Patient Safety

This study examines how patients conceptualize "responsibility" for their healthcare and make sense of the complex boundaries between patient and professional roles. Focusing on the specific case of patient safety, narrative methods were used to analyze semistructured interviews with 28 people recently discharged from hospital in England. We present a typology of attribution, which demonstrates that patients' attributions of responsibility to staff and/or to patients are informed by two dimensions of responsibility: basis and contingency. The basis of responsibility is the reason for holding an individual or group responsible. The contingency of responsibility is the extent to which that attribution is contextually situated. The article contributes to knowledge about responsibility in complex organizational environments and offers a set of conceptual tools for exploring patients' understanding of responsibility in such contexts. There are implications for addressing patient engagement in care, within and beyond the field of patient safety.

Healthcare scandals and the failings of doctors

PURPOSE

The purpose of this paper is to explore whether official inquiries are an effective method for holding the medical profession to account for failings in the quality and safety of care.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

Through a review of the theoretical literature on professions and documentary analysis of key public inquiry documents and reports in the UK National Health Service (NHS) the authors examine how the misconduct of doctors can be understood using the metaphor of professional wrongdoing as a product of bad apples, bad barrels or bad cellars.

FINDINGS

The wrongdoing literature tends to present an uncritical assumption of increasing sophistication in analysis, as the focus moves from bad apples (individuals) to bad barrels (organisations) and more latterly to bad cellars (the wider system). This evolution in thinking about wrongdoing is also visible in public inquiries, as analysis and recommendations increasingly tend to emphasise cultural and systematic issues. Yet, while organisational and systemic factors are undoubtedly important, there is a need to keep in sight the role of individuals, for two key reasons. First, there is growing evidence that a small number of doctors may be disproportionately responsible for large numbers of complaints and concerns. Second, there is a risk that the role of individual professionals in drawing attention to wrongdoing is being neglected.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

To the best of the authors' knowledge this is the first theoretical and empirical study specifically exploring the role of NHS inquiries in holding the medical profession to account for failings in professional practice.

How to be a very safe maternity unit: An ethnographic study

Maternity care continues to be associated with avoidable harm that can result in serious disability and profound anguish for women, their children, and their families, and in high costs for healthcare systems. As in other areas of healthcare, improvement efforts have typically focused either on implementing and evaluating specific interventions, or on identifying the contextual features that may be generative of safety (e.g. structures, processes, behaviour, practices, and values), but the dialogue between these two approaches has remained limited. In this article, we report a positive deviance case study of a high-performing UK maternity unit to examine how it achieved and sustained excellent safety outcomes. Based on 143 h of ethnographic observations in the maternity unit, 12 semi-structured interviews, and two focus groups with staff, we identified six mechanisms that appeared to be important for safety: collective competence; insistence on technical proficiency; monitoring, coordination, and distributed cognition; clearly articulated and constantly reinforced standards of practice, behaviour, and ethics; monitoring multiple sources of intelligence about the unit's state of safety; and a highly intentional approach to safety and improvement. These mechanisms were nurtured and sustained through both a specific intervention (known as the PROMPT programme) and, importantly, the unit's contextual features: intervention and context shaped each other in both direct and indirect ways. The mechanisms were also influenced by the unit's structural conditions, such as staffing levels and physical environment. This study enhances understanding of what makes a maternity unit safe, paving the way for better design of improvement approaches. It also advances the debate on quality and safety improvement by offering a theoretically and empirically grounded analysis of the interplay between interventions and context of implementation.

Research and Global Health Emergencies: On the Essential Role of Best Practice

This article addresses an important, overlooked regulatory challenge during global health emergencies (GHEs). It provides novel insights into how, and why, best practice can support decision makers in interpreting and implementing key guidance on conducting research during GHEs. The ability to conduct research before, during and after such events is crucial. The recent West-African Ebola outbreaks and the Zika virus have highlighted considerable room for improvement in meeting the imperative to research and rapidly develop effective therapies. A means of effectively capturing these experiences and folding them into future decision-making is lacking; the need for effective practical translational measures remains. The challenge for the research community lies in extracting meaningful action-guiding content from pre-existing guidelines-which draw upon practical examples of guidelines 'in action'-that assist in determining how to act in a particular (future) situation. Insights are provided into the role of best practice as a means to do so; such examples can provide invaluable support to decision makers in interpreting high-level guidance; overarching guidelines retain their necessary level of generality and flexibility, whilst corresponding best practice examples-which incorporate important lessons learned-illustrate how such guidelines can be interpreted at a practical level.

Discursive practice - lean thinking, nurses' responsibilities and the cost to care

PURPOSE

The purpose of this paper is to explore the literature regarding work intensification that is being experienced by nurses, to examine the effects this is having on their capacity to complete care. The authors contend that nurses' inability to provide all the care patients require, has negative implications on their professional responsibility.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

The authors used institutional ethnography to review the discourse in the literature. This approach supports inquiry through the review of text in order to uncover activities that remain institutionally accepted but unquestioned and hidden.

FINDINGS

What the authors found was that the quality and risk management forms an important part of lean thinking, with the organisational culture influencing outcomes; however, the professional cost to nurses has not been fully explored.

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS

The text uncovered inconsistency between what organisations accepted as successful cost savings, and what nurses were experiencing in their attempts to achieve the care in the face of reduced time and human resources. Nurses' attempts at completing care were done at the risk of their own professional accountability.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Nurses are working in lean and stressful environments and are struggling to complete care within reduced resource allocations. This leads to care rationing, which negatively impacts on nurses' professional practice, and quality of care provision.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This approach is a departure from the standard qualitative review because the focus is on the textual relationships between what is being advocated by organisations directing cost reduction and what is actioned by the nurses working at the coalface. The discordant standpoints between these two juxtapositions are identified.

Factors Influencing Team Behaviors in Surgery: A Qualitative Study to Inform Teamwork Interventions

BACKGROUND

Surgical excellence demands teamwork. Poor team behaviors negatively affect team performance and are associated with adverse events and worse outcomes. Interventions to improve surgical teamwork focusing on frontline team members' nontechnical skills have proliferated but shown mixed results. Literature on teamwork in organizations suggests that team behaviors are also contingent on psychosocial, cultural, and organizational factors. This study examined factors influencing surgical team behaviors to inform more contextually sensitive and effective approaches to optimizing surgical teamwork.

METHODS

This qualitative study of cardiac surgical teams in a large United States teaching hospital included 34 semistructured interviews. Thematic network analysis was used to examine perceptions of ideal teamwork and factors influencing team behaviors in the operating room.

RESULTS

Perceptions of ideal teamwork were largely shared, but team members held discrepant views of which team and leadership behaviors enhanced or undermined teamwork. Other factors affecting team behaviors were related to the local organizational culture, including management of staff behavior, variable case demands, and team members' technical competence, and fitness of organizational structures and processes to support teamwork. These factors affected perceptions of what constituted optimal interpersonal and team behaviors in the operating room.

CONCLUSIONS

Team behaviors are contextually contingent and organizationally determined, and beliefs about optimal behaviors are not necessarily shared. Interventions to optimize surgical teamwork require establishing consensus regarding best practice, ability to adapt as circumstances require, and organizational commitment to addressing contextual factors that affect teams.

Improvement Science Meets Improvement Scholarship: Reframing Research for Better Healthcare

In this editorial essay I explore the possibilities of 'improvement scholarship' in order to set the scene for the theme of, and the other papers in, this issue. I contrast a narrow conception of quality improvement (QI) research with a much broader and more inclusive conception, arguing that we should greatly extend the existing dialogue between 'problem-solving' and 'critical' currents in improvement research. I have in mind the potential for building a much larger conversation between those people in 'improvement science' who are expressly concerned with tackling the problems facing healthcare and the wider group of colleagues who are engaged in health-related scholarship but who do not see themselves as particularly interested in quality improvement, indeed who may be critical of the language or concerns of QI. As one contribution to that conversation I suggest that that the increasing emphasis on theory and rigour in improvement research should include more focus on normative theory and rigour. The remaining papers in the issue are introduced including the various ways in which they handle the 'implicit normativity' of QI research and practice, and the linked theme of combining relatively 'tidy' and potentially 'unruly' forms of knowledge.

Analysing healthcare coordination using translational mobilization

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to introduce translational mobilization theory (TMT) and explore its application for healthcare quality improvement purposes.

Design/methodology/approach

TMT is a generic sociological theory that explains how projects of collective action are progressed in complex organizational contexts. This paper introduces TMT, outlines its ontological assumptions and core components, and explores its potential value for quality improvement using rescue trajectories as an illustrative case.

Findings

TMT has value for understanding coordination and collaboration in healthcare. Inviting a radical reconceptualization of healthcare organization, its potential applications include: mapping healthcare processes, understanding the role of artifacts in healthcare work, analyzing the relationship between content, context and implementation, program theory development and providing a comparative framework for supporting cross-sector learning.

Originality/value

Poor coordination and collaboration are well-recognized weaknesses in modern healthcare systems and represent important risks to quality and safety. While the organization and delivery of healthcare has been widely studied, and there is an extensive literature on team and inter-professional working, we lack readily accessible theoretical frameworks for analyzing collaborative work practices. TMT addresses this gap in understanding.

Cultures of caring: Healthcare 'scandals', inquiries, and the remaking of accountabilities

In the UK, a series of high-profile healthcare 'scandals' and subsequent inquiries repeatedly point to the pivotal role culture plays in producing and sustaining healthcare failures. Inquiries are a sociotechnology of accountability that signal a shift in how personal accountabilities of healthcare professionals are being configured. In focusing on problematic organizational cultures, these inquiries acknowledge, make visible, and seek to distribute a collective responsibility for healthcare failures. In this article, I examine how the output of one particular inquiry - The Report of the Morecambe Bay Investigation - seeks to make culture visible and accountable. I question what it means to make culture accountable and show how the inquiry report enacts new and old forms of accountability: conventional forms that position actors as individuals, where actions or decisions have distinct boundaries that can be isolated from the ongoing flow of care, and transformative forms that bring into play a remote geographical location, the role of professional ideology, as well as a collective cultural responsibility.