Improving the safety of oxygen therapy in hospitals: summary of a safety report from the National Patient Safety Agency

Development and validation of a questionnaire to assess the doctors and nurses knowledge of acute oxygen therapy

Background

Prescription and administration of oxygen in emergencies by healthcare providers are reported to be inappropriate in most settings. There is a huge gap in the knowledge of health care providers on various aspects of oxygen therapy, and this may be a barrier to optimal oxygen administration. Hence, it is essential to ascertain providers’ knowledge of acute oxygen therapy so that appropriate educational interventions are instituted for better delivery. There is no available validated instrument to assess knowledge of acute oxygen therapy. The study aimed to develop, validate and evaluate the test-retest reliability of a questionnaire to determine the doctors and nurses understanding of acute oxygen therapy.

Methods

This study involved the development of the questionnaire contents by a literature review, assessment of face validity (n = 5), content validity, using a panel of experts (n = 10), item analysis and test-retest reliability among a sample (n = 121) of doctors and nurses.

Results

Face validity indicated that the questionnaire was quick to complete (10–15 min), most items were easy to follow and comprehensible. The global content validity index (S-CVI) was 0.85. The test-retest reliability statistics showed a kappa coefficient of 0.546–0.897 (all P<0.001) and percentage agreement of 80–98.3% indicating high temporal stability in the target population. In total, 90% of the items fulfilled the reliability acceptance criteria. Item discrimination analysis showed that most questions were at an acceptable level. The final questionnaire included 37 item questions and eight sections.

Conclusion

The designed questionnaire is a reliable and valid tool for assessing knowledge of acute oxygen therapy among doctors and nurses.

Acute oxygen therapy: a review of prescribing and delivery practices

Oxygen is a commonly used drug in the clinical setting and like other drugs its use must be considered carefully. This is particularly true for those patients who are at risk of type II respiratory failure in whom the risk of hypercapnia is well established. In recent times, several international bodies have advocated for the prescription of oxygen therapy in an attempt to reduce this risk in vulnerable patient groups. Despite this guidance, published data have demonstrated that there has been poor uptake of these recommendations. Multiple interventions have been tested to improve concordance, and while some of these interventions show promise, the sustainability of these interventions are less convincing. In this review, we summarize data that have been published on the prevalence of oxygen prescription and the accurate and appropriate administration of this drug therapy. We also identify strategies that have shown promise in facilitating changes to oxygen prescription and delivery practice. There is a clear need to investigate the barriers, facilitators, and attitudes of clinicians in relation to the prescription of oxygen therapy in acute care. Interventions based on these findings then need to be designed and tested to facilitate the application of evidence-based guidelines to support sustained changes in practice, and ultimately improve patient care.

Patient safety in ambulance services: a scoping review

Background

The role of ambulance services has changed dramatically over the last few decades with the introduction of paramedics able to provide life-saving interventions, thanks to sophisticated equipment and treatments available. The number of 999 calls continues to increase, with adverse events theoretically possible with each one. Most patient safety research is based on hospital data, but little is known concerning patient safety when using ambulance services, when things can be very different. There is an urgent need to characterise the evidence base for patient safety in NHS ambulance services.

Objective

To identify and map available evidence relating to patient safety when using ambulance services.

Design

Mixed-methods design including systematic review and review of ambulance service documentation, with areas for future research prioritised using a Delphi process.

Setting and participants

Ambulance services, their staff and service users in UK.

Data sources

A wide range of data sources were explored. Multiple databases, reference lists from key papers and citations, Google and the NHS Confederation website were searched, and experts contacted to ensure that new data were included in the review. The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science, Science Direct, Emerald, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS), PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC), NHS Evidence, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED),Health Technology Assessment, the FADE library, Current Awareness Service for Health (CASH), OpenDOAR (Directory of Open Access Repositories) and Open System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe (OpenSIGLE) and Zetoc (The British Library's Electronic Table of Contents) were searched from 1 January 1980 to 12 October 2011. Publicly available documents and issues identified by National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA), NHS Litigation Authority (NHSLA) and coroners’ reports were considered. Opinions and perceptions of senior managers, ambulance staff and service users were solicited.

Review methods

Data were extracted from annual reports using two-stage thematic analysis, data from quality accounts were collated with safety priorities tabulated and considered using thematic analysis, NPSA incident report data were collated and displayed comparatively using descriptive statistics, claims reported to NHSLA were analysed to identify number and cost of claims from mistakes and/or poor service, and summaries of coroners’ reports were assessed using thematic analysis to identify underlying safety issues. The depth of analysis is limited by the remit of a scoping exercise and availability of data.

Results

We identified studies exploring different aspects of safety, which were of variable quality and with little evidence to support activities currently undertaken by ambulance services. Adequately powered studies are required to address issues of patient safety in this service, and it appeared that national priorities were what determined safety activities, rather than patient need. There was inconsistency of information on attitudes and approaches to patient safety, exacerbated by a lack of common terminology.

Conclusion

Patient safety needs to become a more prominent consideration for ambulance services, rather than operational pressures, including targets and driving the service. Development of new models of working must include adequate training and monitoring of clinical risks. Providers and commissioners need a full understanding of the safety implications of introducing new models of care, particularly to a mobile workforce often isolated from colleagues, which requires a body of supportive evidence and an inherent critical evaluation culture. It is difficult to extrapolate findings of clinical studies undertaken in secondary care to ambulance service practice and current national guidelines often rely on consensus opinion regarding applicability to the pre-hospital environment. Areas requiring further work include the safety surrounding discharging patients, patient accidents, equipment and treatment, delays in transfer/admission to hospital, and treatment and diagnosis, with a clear need for increased reliability and training for improving handover to hospital.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Oxygen toxicity

Oxygen is one of the most widely available and used therapeutic agents in the world. However, it is all too easy forget that oxygen is a prescribable drug with specific biochemical and physiologic actions, a distinct range of effective doses and well-defined adverse effects at high doses. The human body is affected in different ways depending on the type of exposure. Short exposures to high partial pressures at greater than atmospheric pressure lead to central nervous system toxicity, most commonly seen in divers or in hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Pulmonary and ocular toxicity results from longer exposure to elevated oxygen levels at normal atmospheric pressure.

Update on the role of palliative oxygen

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Breathlessness remains a frequent and burdensome symptom for individuals with life-limiting symptoms in both malignant and nonmalignant settings. As oxygen therapy is frequently given as part of the management of breathlessness and is associated with costs, treatment burden and potential dangers, it is timely to review the efficacy and appropriateness of palliative oxygen therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite the widespread use of oxygen therapy in clinical and community settings, data supporting this approach is sparse. The benefits of long-term oxygen therapy for severely hypoxaemic people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are proven; however, mounting evidence suggests that oxygen does not confer additional benefit over medical air for the relief of refractory breathlessness in people with mild or absent hypoxaemia.

SUMMARY

On the basis of the findings of this review, the routine use of palliative oxygen therapy without detailed assessment of pathogenesis and reversibility of symptoms cannot be justified. Promoting self-management strategies, such as cool airflow across the face, exercise and psychological support for patients and carers, should be considered before defaulting to oxygen therapy. If palliative oxygen therapy is considered for individuals with transient or mild hypoxaemia, a therapeutic trial should be conducted with clinical review after 3 days to assess the net clinical benefit and patient preference.