Involvement of patients with cancer in patient safety: a qualitative study of current practices, potentials and barriers

Exploring the dynamics of physician-patient relationships: Factors affecting patient satisfaction and complaints

This review identifes the factors influencing the relationship between physicians and patients that can lead to patients' dissatisfaction and medical complaints. Utilizing a systemic approach 92 studies were retrieved which included quantitative, qualitative, and mixed method studies. Through a thematic analysis of the literature, we identified three interrelated main themes that can influence the relationship between physicians and patients, patients' satisfaction, and the decision to file a medico-legal complaint. The main themes include patient and physician characteristics; the interpersonal relationship between physicians and patients; and the health care system and policies, with relevant subthemes. These themes are demonstrated in a descriptive model. The review suggests areas of focus for physicians who may wish to increase their awareness around the potential sources of relational problems with their patients. Identifying these issues may assist in improvements in the therapeutic relationship with patients, can reduce their medico-legal risk, and enhance the quality of their clinical practice. The findings can also be utilized to support andragogical principles for medical learners. The article can serve as a structured framework to identify potential problems and gaps to design and test effective interventions to mitigate these potential relational problems between physician-patient.

What Do Patients and Their Carers Do to Support the Safety of Cancer Treatment and Care? A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients and their carers face a multitude of challenges in the treatment journey; the full scope of how they are involved in promoting safety and supporting resilient healthcare is not known.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to undertake a scoping review to explore, document, and understand existing research, which explores what cancer patients and their carers do to support the safety of their treatment and care.

DESIGN

This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Five online databases were searched from 2000 to 2021 to identify primary literature exploring perspectives on patient and caregiver involvement in maintaining their safety during cancer care. Narrative synthesis was then conducted on the included literature.

RESULTS

Of the 1582 results generated from the initial search, 16 studies were included in the review. Most consisted of qualitative semistructured interviews with patients, as well as carers and healthcare professionals (HCP). Four narrative themes were identified: patient perception of safety and their involvement; patients take charge of their own care and well-being; safety as a dynamic collective responsibility; and carers are an undersupported asset. Patients and their carers involve themselves in a variety of behaviors in physical care, well-being, communication, and care coordination to ensure safety and support system resilience. This review adds a novel perspective on cancer patient and caregiver involvement in supporting resilient healthcare.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and their carers play an important role in promoting safe cancer care and healthcare system resilience. Further research is recommended to realize the full extent of the system gaps encountered and mediated by patients and their carers.

Family Safety Reporting in Hospitalized Children With Medical Complexity

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Hospitalized children with medical complexity (CMC) are at high risk of medical errors. Their families are an underutilized source of hospital safety data. We evaluated safety concerns from families of hospitalized CMC and patient/parent characteristics associated with family safety concerns.

METHODS

We conducted a 12-month prospective cohort study of English- and Spanish-speaking parents/staff of hospitalized CMC on 5 units caring for complex care patients at a tertiary care children's hospital. Parents completed safety and experience surveys predischarge. Staff completed surveys during meetings and shifts. Mixed-effects logistic regression with random intercepts controlling for clustering and other patient/parent factors evaluated associations between family safety concerns and patient/parent characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 155 parents and 214 staff completed surveys (>89% response rates). 43% (n = 66) had ≥1 hospital safety concerns, totaling 115 concerns (1-6 concerns each). On physician review, 69% of concerns were medical errors and 22% nonsafety-related quality issues. Most parents (68%) reported concerns to staff, particularly bedside nurses. Only 32% of parents recalled being told how to report safety concerns. Higher education (adjusted odds ratio 2.94, 95% confidence interval [1.21-7.14], P = .02) and longer length of stay (3.08 [1.29-7.38], P = .01) were associated with family safety concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

Although parents of CMC were infrequently advised about how to report safety concerns, they frequently identified medical errors during hospitalization. Hospitals should provide clear mechanisms for families, particularly of CMC and those from disadvantaged backgrounds, to share safety concerns. Actively engaging patients/families in reporting will allow hospitals to develop a more comprehensive, patient-centered view of safety.

Family Safety Reporting in Medically Complex Children: Parent, Staff, and Leader Perspectives

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Despite compelling evidence that patients and families report valid and unique safety information, particularly for children with medical complexity (CMC), hospitals typically do not proactively solicit patient or family concerns about patient safety. We sought to understand parent, staff, and hospital leader perspectives about family safety reporting in CMC to inform future interventions.

METHODS

This qualitative study was conducted at 2 tertiary care children's hospitals with dedicated inpatient complex care services. A research team conducted approximately 60-minute semistructured, individual interviews with English and Spanish-speaking parents of CMC, physicians, nurses, and hospital leaders. Audio-recorded interviews were translated, transcribed, and verified. Two researchers coded data inductively and deductively developed and iteratively refined the codebook with validation by a third researcher. Thematic analysis allowed for identification of emerging themes.

RESULTS

We interviewed 80 participants (34 parents, 19 nurses and allied health professionals, 11 physicians, and 16 hospital leaders). Four themes related to family safety reporting were identified: (1) unclear, nontransparent, and variable existing processes, (2) a continuum of staff and leadership buy-in, (3) a family decision-making calculus about whether to report, and (4) misaligned staff and parent priorities and expectations. We also identified potential strategies for engaging families and staff in family reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

Although parents were deemed experts about their children, buy-in about the value of family safety reporting among staff and leaders varied, staff and parent priorities and expectations were misaligned, and family decision-making around reporting was complex. Strategies to address these areas can inform design of family safety reporting interventions attuned to all stakeholder groups.

Patient safety improvement with the patient engagement in Iran: A best practice implementation project

Background

Patient engagement in patient safety is aimed at increasing the awareness and participation of patients in error-prevention strategies. The aim of this project was to improve the patient safety with the patient engagement within the local context of a maternity hospital by implementing best practice.

Methods

A clinical audit was conducted using the JBI Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System tool. The current project was conducted in surgical ward of Shahid-Beheshti maternity hospital, Iran. The sample size was 46 patients and 46 healthcare practitioners for both the baseline and follow-up. In phase 1, four audit criteria were used and a baseline audit was conducted for this project. In phase 2, barriers to compliance were identified, and strategies were adopted to promote best practice. In phase 3, a follow-up audit was conducted.

Results

The results showed varying levels of compliance with the four criteria used in this project. The criterion 1, which was related to training of healthcare practitioners on how they can support patients, has the highest compliance at 87% in baseline and follow up data collection. Furthermore, compared with the baseline data (criterion 2 = 52%; criterion 3 = 37%; criterion 4 = 61%), compliance with criteria 2, 3, and 4 notably improved at 85, 76, and 92%, respectively.

Conclusions

The present project successfully implements patient engagement in Iran and reveals varying results on compliance and the increasing knowledge of healthcare practitioners and patients on evidence-based patient engagement in order to improve the patient safety. The used strategies can facilitate implementation of evidence based procedures in clinical practice.

Assessment of medication adherence, medication safety awareness and medication practice among patients with lung cancer: A multicentre cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to explore the current status of medication adherence, safety awareness and practice among patients with lung cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a questionnaire-guided cross-sectional study in Xi'an, Yulin, Hanzhong and Weinan in Shaanxi Province, China, from April to June 2021 for a period of 3 months. The study questionnaire was developed according to previous related studies reported in the literature, and includes basic demographic information and patients' medication safety questions. The data were double-entered using EpiData 3.1 software; descriptive statistics, t-test, analysis of variance, the Kruskal-Wallis test and the Mann-Whitney U-test were performed to analyse the data.

RESULTS

A total of 567 participants were included, and 409 valid questionnaires were finally completed, with an effective response rate of 72.13%. More than 80% of patients showed good medication adherence; the average adherence score was 22 ± 2.68 of 25. The average score for medication safety awareness was 16.40 ± 4.41, which was significantly lower than that of medication adherence (p < .001). Only 22.74% of patients always checked their medicines before a nurse administered them; 17.60% of patients never checked their medicines. Few patients actively consulted an health care professional to understand safety information before taking a medication. A significant difference existed in safety awareness scores among age groups (p = .039) and geographic regions (p < .001). Patients with three or more comorbidities had the lowest awareness scores (p = .027).

CONCLUSION

We found that patients with lung cancer showed better medication adherence, but their awareness about medication safety was poor. Older patients, those with comorbidities and patients in regions with poor medical resources may have worse awareness about safety. Current medication education for patients should not only aim to improve adherence but should also encourage patients to take greater responsibility for their own safety and to actively participate in their medication safety. Greater systematic and individualized medication safety information is needed for older patients, those with more comorbidities and patients in areas with poor medical resources.

PATIENT CONTRIBUTION

We conducted a questionnaire-guided cross-sectional study on hospitalized lung cancer patients in Shaanxi Province to explore the patients' practices related to safety medication, including medication adherence and medication safety awareness.

Barriers and facilitators to patient engagement in patient safety from patients and healthcare professionals' perspectives: A systematic review and meta-synthesis

AIMS

To explore patients' and healthcare professionals' (HCPs) perceived barriers and facilitators to patient engagement in patient safety.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-synthesis from five computerized databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and PsycINFO, as well as grey literature and reference lists of included studies. Data were last searched in December 2019 with no limitation on the year of publication. Qualitative and Mix-methods studies that explored HCPs' and patients' perceptions of barriers and facilitators to patient engagement in patient safety were included. Two authors independently screened the titles and the abstracts of studies. Next, the full texts of the screened studies were reviewed by two authors. Potential discrepancies were resolved by consensus with a third author. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for quality appraisal. Thematic analysis was used to synthesize results.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies out of 2616 were included in this systematic review. Themes related to barriers included: patient unwillingness, HCPs' unwillingness, and inadequate infrastructures. Themes related to facilitators were: encouraging patients, sharing information with patients, establishing trustful relationship, establishing patient-centred care and improving organizational resources.

CONCLUSION

Patients have an active role in improving their safety. Strategies are required to address barriers that hinder or prevent patient engagement and create capacity and facilitate action.

Patient participation in care safety: Primary Health Care professionals' perception

OBJECTIVES

to analyze health professionals' perception about the meaning and practice of patient involvement in care safety in Primary Health Care.

METHODS

this is an exploratory, qualitative study, developed with 22 professionals in the Federal District, Brazil. A semi-structured interview was conducted between October and November/2018. Content analysis was carried out according to Bardin.

RESULTS

nurses, physicians, dentists, among others, participated. The following categories emerged: Meaning of patient involvement in care safety; Factors intervening in patient involvement in care safety; Strategies for patient involvement in care safety; Qualification for patient involvement in care safety.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

the meaning of patient involvement for care safety was associated with co-responsibility and patient-centered care. Professionals' practice revealed intervening factors and the use of involvement strategies. A gap was identified in training on patient involvement in care safety.

Scoping review of patients' attitudes about their role and behaviours to ensure safe care at the direct care level

BACKGROUND

To improve harm prevention, patient engagement in safety at the direct care level is advocated. For patient safety to most effectively include patients, it is critical to reflect on existing evidence, to better position future research with implications for education and practice.

METHODS

As part of a multi-phase study, which included a qualitative descriptive study (Duhn & Medves, 2018), a scoping review about patient engagement in safety was conducted. The objective was to review papers about patients' attitudes and behaviours concerning their involvement in ensuring their safe care. The databases searched included MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE (year ending 2019).

RESULTS

This review included 35 papers about "Patient Attitudes" and 125 papers about "Patient Behaviours"-indicative of growing global interest in this field. Several patterns emerged from the review, including that most investigators have focused on a particular dimension of harm prevention, such as asking about provider handwashing, and there is less known about patients' opinions about their role in safety generally and how to actualize it in a way that is right for them. While patients may indicate favourable attitudes toward safety involvement generally, intention to act or actual behaviours may be quite different.

CONCLUSION

This review, given its multi-focus across the continuum of care, is the first of its kind based on existing literature. It provides an important international "mapping" of the initiatives that are underway to engage patients in different elements of safety and their viewpoints, and identifies the gaps that remain.

Defining Patient Engagement in Research: Results of a Systematic Review and Analysis: Report of the ISPOR Patient-Centered Special Interest Group

OBJECTIVES

Lack of clarity on the definition of "patient engagement" has been highlighted as a barrier to fully implementing patient engagement in research. This study identified themes within existing definitions related to patient engagement and proposes a consensus definition of "patient engagement in research."

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify definitions of patient engagement and related terms in published literature (2006-2018). Definitions were extracted and qualitatively analyzed to identify themes and characteristics. A multistakeholder approach, including academia, industry, and patient representation, was taken at all stages. A proposed definition is offered based on a synthesis of the findings.

RESULTS

Of 1821 abstracts identified and screened for eligibility, 317 were selected for full-text review. Of these, 169 articles met inclusion criteria, from which 244 distinct definitions were extracted for analysis. The most frequently defined terms were: "patient-centered" (30.5%), "patient engagement" (15.5%), and "patient participation" (13.4%). The majority of definitions were specific to the healthcare delivery setting (70.5%); 11.9% were specific to research. Among the definitions of "patient engagement," the most common themes were "active process," "patient involvement," and "patient as participant." In the research setting, the top themes were "patient as partner," "patient involvement," and "active process"; these did not appear in the top 3 themes of nonresearch definitions.

CONCLUSION

Distinct themes are associated with the term "patient engagement" and with engagement in the "research" setting. Based on an analysis of existing literature and review by patient, industry, and academic stakeholders, we propose a scalable consensus definition of "patient engagement in research."

Exploring the barriers to patient engagement in the delivery of safe care in Iranian hospitals: A qualitative study

Aim

To investigate barriers to patient engagement in the delivery of safe hospital care.

Design

Qualitative exploratory study.

Methods

A qualitative study with 35 Iranian health professionals was conducted from February to April 2019 using semi-structured interviews to elicit their opinions. MAXQDA 11 software was used for data management, and the data were analysed using framework analysis.

Results

Barriers, which potentially have negative impact on patient engagement in the delivery of safer care, were categorized into four themes. The first category included patient-related barriers such as low levels of health literacy, ineffective education, patient unwillingness and cultural barriers. The second category included staff-related barriers such as the existence of negative attitudes towards engaging patients in matters relating to patient safety, ineffective communication, high workload and the reluctance on the part of physicians to engage with patients. Barriers created by limited resources and inadequate training provided by universities and in the workplace formed the third category and community-related barriers such as the inadequate dissemination of information via the mass media and a lack of community-based services formed the fourth category.

Conclusion

Results demonstrate the multilayered nature of the significant barriers to the engagement of patients in the delivery of safe care and reflect the need for a collaborative approach between the recipients of care, researchers, care providers and policy makers if these are to be overcome.

Patient and family engagement as a potential approach for improving patient safety: A systematic review

AIMS

To obtain a comprehensive insight of the impact of patient and family engagement on patient safety and identify issues in implementing this approach.

BACKGROUND

Patient and family engagement is increasingly emerging as a potential approach for improving patient safety.

DESIGN

Mixed method multilevel synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Cochrance Library (January 2009-April 2018).

REVIEW METHODS

The review was conducted according to the principles recommended by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review and in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Forty-two relevant studies were identified. Common intervention groups included 'direct care' and 'organization' levels with 'consultation' and 'involvement' approaches, while the 'health system' level and 'partnership and shared leadership' approaches were rarely implemented. Findings revealed positive effects of the interventions on patient safety. Most study participants expressed their willingness to engage in or support patient and family engagement. However, existing gaps and barriers in implementing patient and family engagement were identified.

CONCLUSION

Future research should further focus on issuing consensus guidelines for implementing patient and family engagement in patient safety, extending the research scope for all aspects of patient and family engagement and patient safety and identifying priority areas for action that is suitable for each health facility.

IMPACT

Policymakers should issue guidelines for implementing patient and family engagement in healthcare systems which would enable healthcare providers to implement patient and family engagement and improve patient safety appropriately and effectively.

Patient Involvement in Evaluation of Safety in Oral Antineoplastic Treatment: A Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in Patients and Health Care Professionals

OBJECTIVES

To identify risks associated with delivery of treatment with oral antineoplastic agents in an outpatient setting and to evaluate additional value and feasibility of engaging patients in a proactive risk analysis.

METHODS

We conducted 2 separate but parallel failure mode and effects analyses (FMEAs) among patients and health care professionals (HCPs) at a clinical oncology department in Denmark. Comparative analyses were performed using the FMEA process maps and risk priority numbers (RPNs) as main outcome measures. The FMEAs were augmented by semistructured interviews with HCPs and patients on acceptability and feasibility of FMEAs analyzed using systematic text condensation.

RESULTS

Patients and HCPs found failures in information regarding treatment (cause, aim, and plan) to be of high risk. Also, HCPs found failures in checking for potential interactions to be of high risk. HCPs focused on the in-hospitals procedures, whereas patients identified risks related to both the hospital and the home setting. Both HCPs and patients found participation in the FMEA process meaningful but found the use of RPNs difficult.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient engagement in proactive risk analysis using FMEA is acceptable, meaningful, and feasible, with patients providing a different perspective on the risks associated with oral antineoplastic treatment compared with HCPs.

The role of patients in the delivery of safe care in hospital: Study protocol

AIM

This paper outlines the protocol for a study aimed at exploring perspectives about the role of patients' in the delivery of safe care in hospital.

DESIGN

Qualitative exploratory study.

METHODS

Research Ethics Committee approval for this study was obtained in October 2018. The study will be conducted between February-April 2019 with data collected through focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews and will involve patients and healthcare professionals from hospitals in Tabriz. A descriptive qualitative approach will be adopted, and the data will be managed and analysed using MAXQDA 10 software.

DISCUSSION

The role of patients in furthering their own safety whilst in hospital cannot be underestimated and the results from this study can be used to support the development of practical strategies that address the delivery of safe hospital care and which involve patients and their caregivers.

A 5-facet framework to describe patient engagement in patient safety

Background

Health care remains unacceptably error prone. Recently, efforts to address this problem have included the patient and their family as partners with providers in harm prevention. Policymakers and clinicians have created patient safety strategies to encourage patient engagement, yet they have typically not included patient perspectives in their development or been comprehensively evaluated. We do not have a good understanding of “if” and “how” patients want involvement in patient safety during clinical interactions.

Objective

The objective of this study was to gain insight into patients’ perspectives about their knowledge, comfort level and behaviours in promoting their safety while receiving health care in hospital.

Methods

The study design was a descriptive, exploratory qualitative approach to inductively examine how adult patients in a community hospital describe health‐care safety and see their role in preventing error.

Results

The findings, which included participation of 30 patients and four family members, indicate that although there are shared themes that influence a patient's engagement in safety, beliefs about involvement and actions taken are varied. Five conceptual themes emerged from their narratives: Personal Capacity, Experiential Knowledge, Personal Character, Relationships and Meaning of Safety.

Discussion

These results will be used to develop and test a pragmatic, accessible tool to enable providers a way to collaborate with patients for determining their personal level and type of safety involvement.

Conclusion

The most ethical and responsible approach to health‐care safety is to consider every potential way for improvement. This study provides fundamental insights into the complexity of patient engagement in safety.

Patient participation in patient safety-An exploration of promoting factors

AIMS

To study how internal medicine patients experienced patient safety during their recent periods of care and to identify explanatory factors for patient participation.

BACKGROUND

Patient participation is recognized as one of the main factors promoting quality and safety and the identification of effective interventions that encourage safe care.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of patients (n = 462) in the internal medicine wards (n = 18) of all five Finnish university hospitals. Data were analysed using principal component analysis and multiple linear regression.

RESULTS

Most patients (78%) assessed the level of patient safety on their ward as "very good" or "excellent," 20% of patients assessed it as acceptable or worse. The following were considered to be the most important factors explaining higher patient participation: informing patients about the research and encouraging them to participate (β = 0.378, p < 0.001), providing necessary information promptly and comprehensibly (β = 0.393, p < 0.001), and enhancing patients' ability to identify patient safety incident(s) (β = 0.186, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare workers must improve by encouraging patient participation and providing relevant information to patients.

IMPLICATION FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT

Nursing leaders must be competent to support, lead, and allocate resources for the creation of an environment where patient participation can occur and is valued by health care workers.

Patients' Perspectives of Engagement as a Safety Strategy

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To describe patient engagement as a safety strategy from the perspective of hospitalized surgical patients with cancer.
.

RESEARCH APPROACH

Qualitative, descriptive approach using grounded theory.
.

SETTING

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, New York.
.

PARTICIPANTS

13 hospitalized surgical patients with cancer.
.

METHODOLOGIC APPROACH

Grounded theory with maximum variation sampling.
.

FINDINGS

Participants' perceptions regarding their engagement as a patient safety strategy were expressed through three overarching themes.

CONCLUSIONS

Using direct messaging, such as "your safety" as opposed to "patient safety," and teaching patients specific behaviors to maintain their safety appeared to facilitate patient engagement and increase awareness of safety issues. Patients may be willing to accept some responsibility for ensuring their safety by engaging in behaviors that are intuitive or that they are clearly instructed to do; however, they described their involvement in their safety as a right, not an obligation.
.

INTERPRETATION

Clear, inviting, multimodal communication appears to have the greatest potential to enhance patients' engagement in their safety. Nurses' ongoing assessment of patients' ability to engage is critical insofar as it provides the opportunity to encourage engagement without placing undue burden on them. By employing communication techniques that consider patients' perspectives, nurses can support patient engagement.

Patients' perceptions of their experiences with nurse-patient communication in oncology settings: A focused ethnographic study

Background

The nursing shortage and its impact on patient care are well-documented global issues. Patients living with cancer as a chronic illness have many psychosocial problems and often lack adequate support as a result of ineffective nurse-patient communication. A review of the literature on factors influencing the delivery of psychosocial care to cancer patients indicates that the delivery of psychosocial care in routine cancer nursing within a biomedical healthcare system has not been widely explored.

Objective

To explore patients’ perceptions of their experiences with nurse-patient communication in an oncological clinical environment.

Method

A focused ethnographic study was undertaken in two oncology wards of a hospital in Hong Kong. Data were collected through observations of the ward environment, the activities and instances of nurse-patient communication, semi-structured interviews with patients, and a review of nursing documents.

Results

Two main themes were identified: 1. Nurses’ workload and the environment and 2. Nurse-patient partnership and role expectations. Within these two themes were related subthemes on: Sympathy for the busy nurses; Prioritizing calls to the nurses; Partnership through relationship; Nurses’ role in psychosocial care; and Reduction of psychosocial concerns through physical care.

Conclusions

Many cancer patients do not expect to receive psychosocial care in the form of emotional talks or counseling from busy nurses, but appreciate the attention paid by nurses to their physiological and physical needs. Nurse-patient partnerships in cancer care may reduce the potential workload of nurses. The psychosocial needs of cancer patients could be optimized by providing good physical care through effective communication within a time-constrained oncology setting.

Parents' Perspectives on Navigating the Work of Speaking Up in the NICU

OBJECTIVE

To describe parents' perspectives and likelihood of speaking up about safety concerns in the NICU and identify barriers and facilitators to parents speaking up.

DESIGN

Exploratory, qualitatively driven, mixed-methods design.

SETTING

A 50-bed U.S. academic medical center, open-bay NICU.

PARTICIPANTS

Forty-six parents completed questionnaires, 14 of whom were also interviewed.

METHODS

Questionnaires, interviews, and observations with parents of newborns in the NICU were used. The qualitative investigation was based on constructivist grounded theory. Quantitative measures included ratings and free-text responses about the likelihood of speaking up in response to a hypothetical scenario about lack of clinician hand hygiene. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were integrated in the final interpretation.

RESULTS

Most parents (75%) rated themselves likely or very likely to speak up in response to lack of hand hygiene; 25% of parents rated themselves unlikely to speak up in the same situation. Parents engaged in a complex process of Navigating the work of speaking up in the NICU that entailed learning the NICU, being deliberate about decisions to speak up, and at times choosing silence as a safety strategy. Decisions about how and when to speak up were influenced by multiple factors including knowing my baby, knowing the team, having a defined pathway to voice concerns, clinician approachability, clinician availability and friendliness, and clinician responsiveness.

CONCLUSION

To engage parents as full partners in safety, clinicians need to recognize the complex social and personal dimensions of the NICU experience that influence parents' willingness to speak up about their safety concerns.

Parent-Reported Errors and Adverse Events in Hospitalized Children

IMPORTANCE

Limited data exist regarding the incidence and nature of patient- and family-reported medical errors, particularly in pediatrics.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency with which parents experience patient safety incidents and the proportion of reported incidents that meet standard definitions of medical errors and preventable adverse events (AEs).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We conducted a prospective cohort study from May 2013 to October 2014 within 2 general pediatric units at a children's hospital. Included in the study were English-speaking parents (N = 471) of randomly selected inpatients (ages 0-17 years) prior to discharge. Parents reported via written survey whether their child experienced any safety incidents during hospitalization. Two physician reviewers classified incidents as medical errors, other quality issues, or exclusions (κ = 0.64; agreement = 78%). They then categorized medical errors as harmful (ie, preventable AEs) or nonharmful (κ = 0.77; agreement = 89%). We analyzed errors/AEs using descriptive statistics and explored predictors of parent-reported errors using bivariate statistics. We subsequently reviewed patient medical records to determine the number of parent-reported errors that were present in the medical record. We obtained demographic/clinical data from hospital administrative records.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Medical errors and preventable AEs.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) age of the 383 parents surveyed was 36.6 (8.9) years; most respondents (n = 266) were female. Of 383 parents surveyed (81% response rate), 34 parents (8.9%) reported 37 safety incidents. Among these, 62% (n = 23, 6.0 per 100 admissions) were determined to be medical errors on physician review, 24% (n = 9) were determined to be other quality problems, and 14% (n = 5) were determined to be neither. Thirty percent (n = 7, 1.8 per 100 admissions) of medical errors caused harm (ie, were preventable AEs). On bivariate analysis, children with medical errors appeared to have longer lengths of stay (median [interquartile range], 2.9 days [2.2-6.9] vs 2.5 days [1.9-4.1]; P = .04), more often had a metabolic (14.3% vs 3.0%; P = .04) or neuromuscular (14.3% vs 3.6%; P = .05) condition, and more often had an annual household income greater than $100,000 (38.1% vs 30.1%; P = .06) than those without errors. Fifty-seven percent (n = 13) of parent-reported medical errors were also identified on subsequent medical record review.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Parents frequently reported errors and preventable AEs, many of which were not otherwise documented in the medical record. Families are an underused source of data about errors, particularly preventable AEs. Hospitals may wish to consider incorporating family reports into routine safety surveillance systems.

Enabling sense-making for patients receiving outpatient palliative treatment: A participatory action research driven model for person-centered communication

OBJECTIVES

In clinical palliative cancer care, the diversity of patient concerns over time makes information provision a critical issue, the demands of information-seeking patients presenting a challenge to both the communicative and organizational skills of the health provider. This study puts forward a practice model for communication between patients, their family members, and professional health providers during ongoing palliative chemotherapy; a model which supports the providers in enabling person-centered communication.

METHOD

A constant comparative analysis adapted to participatory action research was applied. The model was developed step-wise in three interrelated cycles, with results from previous studies from palliative cancer care processed in relation to professional health providers' experience-based clinical knowledge. In doing this, focus group discussions were carried out with providers and patients to develop and revise the model.

RESULTS

The Enabling Sense Making model for person-centered communication gave rise to three domains (which are also the major communicative actors in palliative care): the patient, the family, and the provider. These actors were placed in the context of a communicative arena. The three respective domains were built up in different layers discriminating between significant aspects of person-centered communication, from the manifest that is most usually explicated in dialogues, to the latent that tends to be implicitly mediated.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

The model intends to facilitate timely reorientation of care from curative treatment or rehabilitation to palliation, as well as the introduction of appropriate palliative interventions over time during palliative phases. In this way the model is to be regarded a frame for directing the awareness of the professionals, which focuses on how to communicate and how to consider the patient's way of reasoning. The model could be used as a complement to other strategic initiatives for the advancement of palliative care communication. It needs to be further evaluated in regard to practice evidence.

Evaluating iatrogenic prescribing: development of an oncology-focused trigger tool

BACKGROUND

Drug-related iatrogenic effects are common in oncology because chemotherapy is toxic. The evaluation of the application of the guidelines may be a way to understand the occurrence of adverse drug-related event (ADE). There is no specific method for identifying ADEs and measuring harm to patients in oncology.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to develop and test an Oncology Trigger Tool (OTT) for ADEs and to describe ADE characteristics and incidence.

METHODS

A clinical advisory panel identified situations at high risk of ADE occurrence and built 22 triggers with, in each case, an analysis flowchart to confirm or refute occurrence. The OTT was used to review 288 random admissions (Oct. 2010-Sept. 2011) and measure ADE incidence and severity (CTCAE 4.03 - Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events). Tool feasibility (time required), inter-rater (IR) reproducibility and positive predictive value (PPV) were measured.

RESULTS

Overall, 884 triggers were detected and 122 ADEs, with 42.4 ADEs/100 admissions or 46.0 ADEs/1000 patient-days, and a 31.1% rate of severe ADEs. The most common ADEs were hyperglycaemia (14.5%), unplanned drug-related admission within 30 days (13.7%) and opiate-induced constipation (12.1%). Unplanned drug-related admission was the most serious (82.4% incidence of severe harm). Mean time for OTT implementation was 21.8 min; IR reproducibility was high (κ=0.965 (trigger); κ=0.935 (ADE); κ=0.853 (harm)); PPV 22-trigger version was 20.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

ADE analysis flowcharts coupled with standardised grading of harm considerably reduced IR variability, thus providing a robust oncology-focused trigger tool for use in ADE audits and hospital comparisons. The involvement of a clinical advisory panel in tool development should help drive changes for improving practice. Further research on the OTT is warranted.