Using a survey of incident reporting and learning practices to improve organisational learning at a cancer care centre

Multi-Institutional Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Incident Learning: Evaluation of Safety Barriers Using a Human Factors Analysis and Classification System

OBJECTIVES

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) can improve therapeutic ratios and patient convenience, but delivering higher doses per fraction increases the potential for patient harm. Incident learning systems (ILSs) are being increasingly adopted in radiation oncology to analyze reported events. This study used an ILS coupled with a Human Factor Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) and barriers management to investigate the origin and detection of SBRT events and to elucidate how safeguards can fail allowing errors to propagate through the treatment process.

METHODS

Reported SBRT events were reviewed using an in-house ILS at 4 institutions over 2014-2019. Each institution used a customized care path describing their SBRT processes, including designated safeguards to prevent error propagation. Incidents were assigned a severity score based on the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group Report 275. An HFACS system analyzed failing safeguards.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty events were analyzed with 106 near misses (66.2%) and 54 incidents (33.8%). Fifty incidents were designated as low severity, with 4 considered medium severity. Incidents most often originated in the treatment planning stage (38.1%) and were caught during the pretreatment review and verification stage (37.5%) and treatment delivery stage (31.2%). An HFACS revealed that safeguard failures were attributed to human error (95.2%), routine violation (4.2%), and exceptional violation (0.5%) and driven by personnel factors 32.1% of the time, and operator condition also 32.1% of the time.

CONCLUSIONS

Improving communication and documentation, reducing time pressures, distractions, and high workload should guide proposed improvements to safeguards in radiation oncology.

A national survey of the radiotherapy dosimetrist workforce in the UK

OBJECTIVES

To undertake a national survey of the Radiotherapy Dosimetrist workforce within the UK; examining different attributes and experiences, comparing results with published evidence within the literature.

METHODS

A national, anonymised survey was undertaken between Dec 2020 and end of Feb 2021; employing a mixed-methods approach and blend of closed, open-ended answer choices and free-text comments. Questions included range of training routes and job titles; registration status; job tasks and engagement with Continuing Professional Development (CPD).

RESULTS

A total of 223 individuals responded. Nearly half were trained via therapeutic radiography; approximately, a fifth through a clinical technologist/physics routes. Most (70%) had Dosimetrist in their job title. Nearly 70% were statutorily registered, and almost a fifth were in the voluntary register of Clinical Technologists. Most job tasks were in treatment planning - with 57% spending over 70% of their time there. Most notably, 29% were not involved in any CPD scheme. No published evidence showed the same aspects identified here.

CONCLUSIONS

Our survey showed a unique profile of the Radiotherapy Dosimetrist workforce in the UK, with a variety of training routes and statutory registration status. Nearly, a third were not engaged in a CPD scheme - adding to the current discussion that perhaps all Dosimetrists should be statutorily registered, for ensuring safe and effective clinical practice.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

A novel and unique national survey of Dosimetrists working in Radiotherapy in the UK is presented, leading to new insights into current training routes, registration status, job tasks and CPD engagement and needs.

An Intervention to Optimize Attitudes Toward Adverse Events Reporting Among Tunisian Critical Care Nurses

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed at evaluating the impact of a combined-strategies intervention on ICUs nurses' attitudes toward AE reporting.

METHODS

We conducted a quasi-experimental study from January to October 2020 which consisted of an intervention to improve attitudes toward incident reporting among nurses working in 10 intensive care units at a university hospital using the Reporting of Clinical Adverse Events Scale. The intervention consisted of a 2-hour educational presentation for nurse unit managers and a 30-minute in-units educational training for intensive care unit nurses, which encompassed technical aspects of reporting, the reporting process, a nonpunitive environment, and the importance of submitting reports. The educational presentation was reinforced with distributing posters and brochures and biweekly patient safety rounds that inquired about events, reinforced education, and provided follow-up to incident reports.

RESULTS

All dimensions were significantly improved. Score increased from 27.4% to 42.1% ( P < 0.01) for perceived blame, from 35.2% to 52.5% for perceived criteria for identifying events that should be reported ( P < 0.01), from 34.3% to 46% for perceptions of colleagues' expectations ( P = 0.04), from 37.1% to 51.4% for perceived benefits of reporting ( P = 0.01), and from 29.2% to 51.4% for perceived clarity of reporting procedures ( P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions using a combination of several strategies such as training, safety round, and messaging can be effective and should be considered by hospitals attempting to increase adverse events reporting. Results reinforce the assumption that a nonpunitive environment and the resulting feeling of safety and reassurance are crucial to foster the submission of reports.

Evaluating incident learning systems and safety culture in two radiation oncology departments

INTRODUCTION

Radiation oncology patient pathways are complex. This complexity creates risk and potential for error to occur. Comprehensive safety and quality management programmes have been developed alongside the use of incident learning systems (ILSs) to mitigate risks and errors reaching patients. Robust ILSs rely on the safety culture (SC) within a department. The aim of this study was to assess perceptions and understanding of SC and ILSs in two closely linked radiation oncology departments and to use the results to consider possible quality improvement (QI) of department ILSs and SC.

METHODS

A survey to assess perceptions of SC and the currently used ILSs was distributed to radiation oncologists, radiation therapists and radiation oncology medical physicists in the two departments. The responses of 95 staff were evaluated (63% of staff). The findings were used to determine any areas for improvement in SC and local ILSs.

RESULTS

Differences were shown between the professional cohorts. Barriers to current ILS use were indicated by 67% of respondents. Positive SC was shown in each area assessed: 69% indicated the departments practised a no-blame culture. Barriers identified in one department prompted a QI project to develop a new reporting system and process, improve departmental learning and modify the overall ILS.

CONCLUSION

An understanding of SC and attitudes to ILSs has been established and used to improve ILS reporting, feedback on incidents, departmental learning and the QA program. This can be used for future comparisons as the systems develop.

Incident review in radiation oncology

By its very nature, radiation oncology is a complex, multi-profession dynamic modality of cancer treatment. There are multiple steps with many handovers of work and many opportunities for patient safety to be compromised. Patient safety events can manifest as either actual incidents or near miss/close call events. Reporting and learning from these events is key to quality improvement and patient safety. In this paper, we aim to provide an overview of radiation oncology incident reporting and learning systems. We review the importance of the use of a standardized taxonomy and classification that is specific to radiation oncology workflow, the international systems in current use and the current reporting requirements in Australia and New Zealand. Equally important is the culture that exists alongside the incident learning system. A just culture, where support for reporting exists and there is an adaptive responsive environment to learn and improve patient safety. The incident learning and patient safety system requires constant effort to make it a success. We describe potential measures of safety culture and of relative patient safety and recommend their routine use. We offer this review to stimulate the effort towards a binational voluntary incident learning system, a key pillar for the improvement in patient safety in radiation oncology.

Automated Plan Checking Software Demonstrates Continuous and Sustained Improvements in Safety and Quality: A 3-year Longitudinal Analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to perform a longitudinal analysis of the performance of our automated plan checking software by retrospectively evaluating the number of errors identified in plans delivered to patients in 3, month-long, data collection periods between 2017 and 2020.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Eleven automated checks were retrospectively run on 1169 external beam radiation therapy treatment plans identified as meeting the following criteria: planning target volume-based multifield photon plans receiving a status of treatment approved in March 2017, March 2018, or March 2020. The number of passes (true positives) and flags were recorded. Flags were subcategorized into false negatives, false negatives due to naming conventions, and true negatives. In addition, 2 × 2 contingency tables using a 2-tailed Fisher's exact test were used to determine whether there were nonrandom associations between the output of the automated plan checking software and whether the check was manual or automated at the original time of treatment approval.

RESULTS

A statistically significant decrease in flags between the pre- and postautomation data sets was observed for 4 contour-based checks, namely adjacent structures overlap, empty structures and missing slices, overlap between body and couch, and laterality, as well as a check that determined whether the plan's global maximum dose was within the planning target volume. A review of the origins of false negatives was fed back into the design of the checks to improve the reliability of the system and help avoid warning fatigue.

CONCLUSIONS

Periodic and longitudinal review of the performance of automated software was essential for monitoring and understanding its impact on error rates, as well as for optimization of the tool to adapt to regular changes of clinical practice. The automated plan checking software has demonstrated continuous contributions to the safe and effective delivery of external beam radiation therapy to our patient population, an impact that extends beyond its initial implementation and deployment.

A baseline assessment of patient safety culture and its associated factors from the perspective of critical care nurses: Results from 10 hospitals

INTRODUCTION

Critical care nurses are considered the key to patient safety improvement and play a vital role in enhancing quality of care in intensive care units (ICUs) where adverse events are frequent and have severe consequences. Moreover, there is recognition of the importance of the assessment and the development of patient safety culture (PSC) as a strategic focus for the improvement of patient safety and healthcare quality, notably in critical care settings.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess critical care nurses' perception of PSC and to determine its associated factors.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted among nurses working in the ICUs of the Tunisian centre (six Tunisian governorates). The study instrument was the French validated version of the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture questionnaire, comprising 10 dimensions and a total of 50 items.

RESULTS

A total of 249 nurses from 18 ICUs participated in the study, with a participation rate of 87.36%. The dimensions scores ranged between 17.2% for the dimension "frequency of events reported" and 50.1% for the dimension "teamwork within units". Multivariable logistic regression indicated that respondents who worked in private hospitals were five times more likely to have a developed PSC (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 5.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], [2.28, 12.51]; p < 10^-3). Similarly, participants who worked in a certified hospital were two times more likely to have a more developed PSC than respondents who work in noncertified hospitals (AOR: 2.51; 95% CI, [.92-6.82]; p = 0.041). In addition, an increased nurse-per-patient ratio (i.e., reduced workload) increased PSC (AOR: 1.10; 95% CI, [1.02-1.12]; p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

This study has shown that the state of critical care nurses' PSC is critically low and these baseline results can help to form a plan of actions for improvements.

Missing the Near Miss: Recognizing Valuable Learning Opportunities in Radiation Oncology

PURPOSE

"Near miss" events are valuable low-cost learning opportunities in radiation oncology as they do not result in patient harm and are more pervasive than adverse events that do. Near misses vary depending on the presence of a latent error of behavior or process, and the presence of an enabling condition predisposing the patient to harm. These nuanced distinctions across near miss types can elicit different cognitive biases affecting the recognition of near misses as learning opportunities. We define near miss types in radiation oncology and explore the differential perceptions among radiation oncology staff.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Six event types were defined based on attributes of latent error and enabling conditions: "hit," "potential hit," "almost happened," "fortuitous catch," "could have happened," and "process-based catch." These events were illustrated with an example of a patient receiving pacemaker cardiac clearance before radiation treatment. A survey assessing (1) success versus failure of an event and (2) willingness to report the event was administered to a radiation oncology department using the pacemaker example. Mean scores for each near miss type were compared.

RESULTS

Ninety-five staff members (74%) completed the survey. Perceived success scores and willing-to-report scores significantly differed by near miss type (P = .042 for success ratings; P < .0001 for willingness to report). "Could have happened" events were viewed as less successful and were more likely to be reported than "almost happened" events (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Cognitive biases appear to influence whether and how near miss types are recognized as report-worthy. Education of near miss types and engaging staff for quality improvement may improve recognition.

Learning from Incidents: A Supply Chain Management Perspective in Military Environments

Supply chain management (SCM) represents a crucial role in the military sector to ensure operation sustainability. Starting from the NATO handbook for military organizational learning, this paper aims at investigating the link between technical inconveniences and sustainable supply chain operations. Taking advantage of the learning from incidents (LFI) models traditionally used in the risk and safety management area, this paper proposes an information management system to support organizational learning from technical inconveniences in a military supply chain. The approach is discussed with reference to the Italian context, in line with international and national standards for technical inconvenience reporting. The results of the paper show the benefits of adopting a systematic LFI system for technical inconveniences, providing related exemplar business intelligence dashboards. Further implications for the generalization of the proposed information management system are presented to foster a healthy and effective reporting environment in military scenarios.

[Safety in radiationtherapy. Results after 9 years implementation of incidents reporting system]

INTRODUCTION

Radiation therapy (RT) is a complex process that employs high-dose radiation for therapeutic purposes. Incident reporting and analysis, in addition to being a legal requirement in RT, provides information that helps to improve patient safety. This paper describes our experiences over a 9 year period in which a local incident reporting and learning system (SNAI) specific to RT was employed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The center has 4 lineal accelerators that treat a total of 1900 patients annually. The first action taken with a view to improving patient safety was the implementation of a multidisciplinary RT safety group (GSRT), who decided to employing a methodology based on incident reporting. For this purpose, a local SNAI was implemented, adapting the ROSEIS incident reporting system used and consolidated by the European Society of Radiation Oncology Therapy (ESTRO). All incidents in which patients received an incorrect RT session were considered adverse events (AE) and were thus analyzed. Finally, the opinion of the professionals involved in relation to the SNAI and the functioning of the safety group was evaluated by means of a survey.

RESULTS

From June 2009 to October 2018, 1708 incidents were recorded, with an increasing incidence observed over time. Approximately 2.5% of the incidents reported were AE. The remainders were events that did not affect the patient. As many as 55% of incidents were detected in the treatment administration phase. Radiotherapy technicians were the professionals who reported more incidents. The majority of recorded cases originated from procedural shortcomings relating to communication or work protocols. Implemented remedial actions were aimed at reducing the frequency of AE and facilitating its early detection. Actions employed were essentially: drafting and revision of protocols and circuits, implementation of checklists, and training actions. Of the workers surveyed, 85% positively valued the incorporation of the SNAI and the existence of a safety group. However, 15% of the professionals considered that the methodology used in the analysis of incidents was not totally objective i.e punitive in nature.

CONCLUSIONS

The safety of the patient receiving RT has been approached from a methodology based on a local SNAI. The analysis of reported incidents has promoted various actions aimed at improving the safety of patients receiving RT. The methodology used has been well received by the workers and has helped to introduce a culture of patient safety for the majority of professionals involved. Furthermore, the local SNAI facilitates compliance with European regulations regarding the obligation to record incidents in RT.

Assessing patient safety culture in 18 Tunisian adult intensive care units and determination of its associated factors: A multi-center study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess patient safety culture (PSC) in intensive care units (ICUs) and to determine the factors affecting it.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study, conducted from October to November 2017 among professionals practicing in the ICUs of the Tunisian center. After obtaining institutional ethics committee's approval and administrative authorizations, an anonymous paper-based questionnaire was distributed to the participants after obtaining their consent to take part in the study. The measuring instrument used is the French validated version of the "Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture" questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 402 professionals, from 18 ICUs and 10 hospitals, participated in the study with a participation rate of 82.37%. All dimensions were to be improved. The most developed dimension was teamwork within the unit (47.87%) and the least developed dimension was the non-punitive response to error (18.6%). Seven dimensions were significantly more developed in private institutions than in public ones. Results also show that when workload is reduced, the PSC was significantly increased.

CONCLUSION

This study has shown that the PSC in ICUs needs improvement and provided a baseline results to get a clearer vision of the aspects of security that require special attention.

Organizational learning in hospitals: A realist review

AIM

To establish a middle-range theory of organizational learning in hospitals.

DESIGN

A realist review of the literature, conducted according to established standards for realist and meta-narrative evidence syntheses. Middle-range theory development was performed according to Smith and Liehr's recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

Two comprehensive scientific databases and six discipline-focused databases spanning health care, life sciences, business, sociology, and psychology were searched from inception to 12 May 2016.

REVIEW METHODS

Citations meeting the inclusion criteria were appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data extraction was guided by a focus on the contextual factors, mechanisms, and outcomes associated with organizational learning.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 2,332 citations, 147 of which were ultimately included in the review. The included citations were generally of high quality. Reviewed evidence indicates certain aspects of organizational context can be conducive to mechanisms of organizational learning, leading to a range of positive organizational outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This review updates and expands on a previous review of the literature on organizational learning in hospitals, refines the concept of organizational learning in hospitals, and provides a middle-range theory of organizational learning in hospitals.

IMPACT

This updated review provides a strong evidence base for future work on the topic of organizational learning in hospitals. The refined concept of organizational learning makes it possible to develop reliable, valid research instruments that better reflect of the full scope of organizational learning. Finally, the middle-range theory guides researchers and clinical leaders as they advance the science and practice of organizational learning.

The Second Victim Phenomenon: Perspective of Canadian Radiation Therapists

INTRODUCTION

Clinical incidents are an unfortunate reality in the health care system. Patients and their families are the first victims of these incidents. The health care providers involved in the error are considered the second victims. This research aimed to evaluate the level of awareness of the second victim phenomenon (SVP) in Canadian radiation therapists, determine the post-incident emotional and physical reactions experienced, and determine the existing and/or recommended systems for support.

METHODS

Mixed method design comprised two phases. In phase I, Canadian radiation therapists were invited to view an informational presentation about the SVP and complete an online survey. In phase II, participants partook in an online discussion forum.

RESULTS

Survey results indicate that 31% of respondents were previously aware of the SVP and 86% of respondents report having been involved in a clinical incident. In addition, the results confirm that Canadian radiation therapists who have been involved in health care-related incidents do experience emotional and physical reactions. Most respondents indicated they lacked appropriate organizational support to help them recover from the clinical incident. Support from a colleague is the preferred method of support immediately after the incident. Finally, survey respondents indicated a clear desire for implementation of defined processes for postclinical incident supports.

DISCUSSION

The reported level of awareness of the SVP surprised the authors as it was anticipated to be lower; however, there is an obvious need for greater knowledge of the subject. Reported frequency of involvement in a clinical incident as well as the post-clinical reactions experienced are comparable for other health care providers as indicated in the literature. Survey results revealed that emotional and physical reactions were experienced to a greater degree in those unfamiliar with the SVP, indicating potential value to adding an educational component to radiation therapist's training programs as well as on the job training for staff in the workforce. Most respondents requested specific methods of support for recovery after a clinical incident. In addition, an unexpected number of radiation therapists indicated the need for a "no-blame" work environment, which was an unanticipated finding.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the lack of awareness of the SVP in Canadian radiation therapists. It identifies the gap between the needs of the second victims and the perceived lack of supports offered by their facilities. This issue is important for organizations wanting to positively manage clinical incidents and create a culture of safety for the patients and employees.

Incident learning in radiation oncology: A review

Incident learning is a key component for maintaining safety and quality in healthcare. Its use is well established and supported by professional society recommendations, regulations and accreditation, and objective evidence. There is an active interest in incident learning systems (ILS) in radiation oncology, with over 40 publications since 2010. This article is intended as a comprehensive topic review of ILS in radiation oncology, including history and summary of existing literature, nomenclature and categorization schemas, operational aspects of ILS at the institutional level including event handling and root cause analysis, and national and international ILS for shared learning. Core principles of patient safety in the context of ILS are discussed, including the systems view of error, culture of safety, and contributing factors such as cognitive bias. Finally, the topics of medical error disclosure and second victim syndrome are discussed. In spite of the rapid progress and understanding of ILS, challenges remain in applying ILS to the radiation oncology context. This comprehensive review may serve as a springboard for further work.

Development and implementation of a radiation therapy incident learning system compatible with local workflow and a national taxonomy

PURPOSE

Collaborative incident learning initiatives in radiation therapy promise to improve and standardize the quality of care provided by participating institutions. However, the software interfaces provided with such initiatives must accommodate all participants and thus are not optimized for the workflows of individual radiation therapy centers. This article describes the development and implementation of a radiation therapy incident learning system that is optimized for a clinical workflow and uses the taxonomy of the Canadian National System for Incident Reporting - Radiation Treatment (NSIR-RT).

METHODS

The described incident learning system is a novel version of an open-source software called the Safety and Incident Learning System (SaILS). A needs assessment was conducted prior to development to ensure SaILS (a) was intuitive and efficient (b) met changing staff needs and (c) accommodated revisions to NSIR-RT. The core functionality of SaILS includes incident reporting, investigations, tracking, and data visualization. Postlaunch modifications of SaILS were informed by discussion and a survey of radiation therapy staff.

RESULTS

There were 240 incidents detected and reported using SaILS in 2016 and the number of incidents per month tended to increase throughout the year. An increase in incident reporting occurred after switching to fully online incident reporting from an initial hybrid paper-electronic system. Incident templating functionality and a connection with our center's oncology information system were incorporated into the investigation interface to minimize repetitive data entry. A taskable actions feature was also incorporated to document outcomes of incident reports and has since been utilized for 36% of reported incidents.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of SaILS and the NSIR-RT taxonomy has improved the structure of, and staff engagement with, incident learning in our center. Software and workflow modifications informed by staff feedback improved the utility of SaILS and yielded an efficient and transparent solution to categorize incidents with the NSIR-RT taxonomy.

Toward Best Practices for Surgical Morbidity and Mortality Conferences: A Mixed Methods Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess formats for surgical morbidity and mortality conferences (M&M) for strengths and challenges.

DESIGN

A mixed methods approach with local observations to assess key domains of M&M practice (i.e., goals, structure, and process/content) and surveys to assess participants' expectations and experiences.

SETTING

Surgical departments of two teaching hospitals (Boston, USA and Leiden, Netherlands).

PARTICIPANTS

Participants of surgical M&M, including attending surgeons, residents, physician assistants, and medical students (total n = 135).

RESULTS

Surgical M&M practices at both hospitals had education as its overarching goal, but varied in structure and process/content. Expectations were similar at both sites with ≥80% of participants (n = 90; 67% response) expecting M&M to be focused on education as well as quality improvement (QI), blame-free, mandatory for both residents and attendings, and to lead to changes in clinical practice. However, compared to expectations, significantly fewer participants at both sites experienced: a QI focus (both p < 0.001); mandatory faculty attendance (p = 0.004; p < 0.001) and changes to practice (both p < 0.001). In comparison, at the site where an active moderator and QI committee are present, respondents seemed more positive about experiencing a QI focus (73% vs 30%) and changes to practice (44% vs 16%).

CONCLUSION

Despite variation in M&M practice, the same (unmet) expectations existed at both hospitals, indicating that certain challenges may be more universal. M&M was reported to be well-focused on education, and certain aspects (e.g., active moderator and QI committee) seemed beneficial, but expectations were not met for the conference's focus and function for QI. Greater exchange of "best practices" for M&M may enhance the conference's value for improving surgical care.

Barriers and facilitators to learn and improve through morbidity and mortality conferences: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

To explore barriers and facilitators to successful morbidity and mortality conferences (M&M), driving learning and improvement.

DESIGN

This is a qualitative study with semistructured interviews. Inductive, thematic content analysis was used to identify barriers and facilitators, which were structured across a pre-existing framework for change in healthcare.

SETTING

Dutch academic surgical department with a long tradition of M&M.

PARTICIPANTS

An interview sample of surgeons, residents and physician assistants (n=12).

RESULTS

A total of 57 barriers and facilitators to successful M&M, covering 18 themes, varying from 'case type' to 'leadership', were perceived by surgical staff. While some factors related to M&M organisation, others concerned individual or social aspects. Eight factors, of which four were at the social level, had simultaneous positive and negative effects (eg, 'hierarchy' and 'team spirit'). Mediating pathways for M&M success were found to relate to available information, staff motivation and realisation processes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides leads for improvement of M&M practice, as well as for further research on key elements of successful M&M. Various factors were perceived to affect M&M success, of which many were individual and social rather than organisational factors, affecting information and realisation processes but also staff motivation. Based on these findings, practical recommendations were formulated to guide efforts towards best practices for M&M.

A nationwide investigation of radiation therapy event reporting-and-learning systems: Can standards be improved?

INTRODUCTION

Variation exists between event reporting-and-learning systems utilised in radiation therapy. Due to the impact of errors associated with this field of medicine, evidence-based and rigorous systems are imperative. The implementation of such systems facilitates the reactive enhancement of patient safety following an event. The purpose of this study was to evaluate Irish event reporting-and-learning procedures against the current literature using a developed evidence-based process map, and to propose recommendations as to how the national standard could be improved.

METHODS

Radiation Therapy Service Managers of all Irish radiation therapy institutions (n = 12) were invited to participate in an anonymous online questionnaire. Included in the questionnaire was a reporting-and-learning process map developed from evidence-based literature, which was used to assess the institution's practice through the use of vignettes. Frequency analysis of closed-ended questions and thematic analysis of open-ended questions was performed to assess the data.

RESULTS

A 91.7% response rate was achieved. The following areas were found to have the most variation with the evidence-based process map: event classification, external reporting, and dissemination of lessons-learned to a wider audience. Recommendations to standardise practice were made.

CONCLUSION

Opportunities for improvement exist within event reporting-and-learning systems of Irish radiation therapy institutions and recommendations have been made on these. These findings can provide learning for other countries with similar reporting systems.

A cross-national comparison of incident reporting systems implemented in German and Swiss hospitals

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to empirically compare incident reporting systems (IRS) in two European countries and to explore the relationship of IRS characteristics with context factors such as hospital characteristics and characteristics of clinical risk management (CRM).

DESIGN

We performed exploratory, secondary analyses of data on characteristics of IRS from nationwide surveys of CRM practices.

SETTING

The survey was originally sent to 2136 hospitals in Germany and Switzerland.

PARTICIPANTS

Persons responsible for CRM in 622 hospitals completed the survey (response rate 29%).

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Differences between IRS in German and Swiss hospitals were assessed using Chi2, Fisher's Exact and Freeman-Halton-Tests, as appropriate. To explore interrelations between IRS characteristics and context factors (i.e. hospital and CRM characteristics) we computed Cramer's V.

RESULTS

Comparing participating hospitals across countries, Swiss hospitals had implemented IRS earlier, more frequently and more often provided introductory IRS training systematically. German hospitals had more frequently systematically implemented standardized procedures for event analyses. IRS characteristics were significantly associated with hospital characteristics such as hospital type as well as with CRM characteristics such as existence of strategic CRM objectives and of a dedicated position for central CRM coordination.

CONCLUSIONS

This study contributes to an improved understanding of differences in the way IRS are set up in two European countries and explores related context factors. This opens up new possibilities for empirically informed, strategic interventions to further improve dissemination of IRS and thus support hospitals in their efforts to move patient safety forward.

How Effective Are Incident-Reporting Systems for Improving Patient Safety? A Systematic Literature Review

CONTEXT

Incident-reporting systems (IRSs) are used to gather information about patient safety incidents. Despite the financial burden they imply, however,little is known about their effectiveness. This article systematically reviews the effectiveness of IRSs as a method of improving patient safety through organizational learning.

METHODS

Our systematic literature review identified 2 groups of studies: (1)those comparing the effectiveness of IRSs with other methods of error reporting and (2) those examining the effectiveness of IRSs on settings, structures, and outcomes in regard to improving patient safety. We used thematic analysis to compare the effectiveness of IRSs with other methods and to synthesize what was effective, where, and why. Then, to assess the evidence concerning the ability of IRSs to facilitate organizational learning, we analyzed studies using the concepts of single-loop and double-loop learning.

FINDINGS

In total, we identified 43 studies, 8 that compared IRSs with other methods and 35 that explored the effectiveness of IRSs on settings, structures,and outcomes. We did not find strong evidence that IRSs performed better than other methods. We did find some evidence of single-loop learning, that is, changes to clinical settings or processes as a consequence of learning from IRSs, but little evidence of either improvements in outcomes or changes in the latent managerial factors involved in error production. In addition, there was insubstantial evidence of IRSs enabling double-loop learning, that is, a cultural change or a change in mind-set.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that IRSs could be more effective if the criteria for what counts as an incident were explicit, they were owned and ledby clinical teams rather than centralized hospital departments, and they were embedded within organizations as part of wider safety programs.

Incident learning in pursuit of high reliability: implementing a comprehensive, low-threshold reporting program in a large, multisite radiation oncology department

BACKGROUND

Incident learning programs have been recognized as cornerstones of safety and quality assurance in so-called high reliability organizations in industries such as aviation and nuclear power. High reliability organizations are distinguished by their drive to continuously identify and proactively address a broad spectrum of latent safety issues. Many radiation oncology institutions have reported on their experience in tracking and analyzing adverse events and near misses but few have incorporated the principles of high reliability into their programs. Most programs have focused on the reporting and retrospective analysis of a relatively small number of significant adverse events and near misses. To advance a large, multisite radiation oncology department toward high reliability, a comprehensive, cost-effective, electronic condition reporting program was launched to enable the identification of a broad spectrum of latent system failures, which would then be addressed through a continuous quality improvement process.

METHODS

A comprehensive program, including policies, work flows, and information system, was designed and implemented, with use of a low reporting threshold to focus on precursors to adverse events.

RESULTS

In a 46-month period from March 2011 through December 2014, a total of 8,504 conditions (average, 185 per month, 1 per patient treated, 3.9 per 100 fractions [individual treatments]) were reported. Some 77.9% of clinical staff members reported at least 1 condition. Ninety-eight percent of conditions were classified in the lowest two of four severity levels, providing the opportunity to address conditions before they contribute to adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Results after approximately four years show excellent employee engagement, a sustained rate of reporting, and a focus on low-level issues leading to proactive quality improvement interventions.

Agreement between patients and general practitioners on quality deviations during the cancer diagnostic pathway and associations with time to diagnosis

BACKGROUND

High quality and minimal delay are crucial and anticipated elements in the diagnostic cancer pathway as delay in the diagnosis may worsen the prognosis and cause lower patient satisfaction.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe agreement in reported quality deviations (QDs) between general practitioners (GPs) and cancer patients during the diagnostic pathway in primary care and to estimate the association between length of diagnostic interval and level of agreement on reported QDs.

METHODS

The study was carried out as a Danish cross-sectional study of incident cancer patients identified in the Danish National Patient Registry. Data were collected by independent questionnaires from patients (response rate: 53.0%) and their GPs (response rate: 73.8%), and 2177 pairs of questionnaires were subsequently combined. Agreement between GP- and patient-reported QDs was estimated using Cohen's Kappa, whereas the association between level of agreement and time to diagnosis was estimated using quantile regression.

RESULTS

Patients reported QDs in 29.0% and GPs in 28.5% of the cases, but agreed only slightly on QD presence (Kappas between -0.08 and 0.26). Agreement on 'QD presence' was associated with a 54-day (95%CI: 44-64) longer time to diagnosis than agreement on 'no QD presence'. The association with a longer diagnostic interval was stronger when only GP reported a QD the association than when only patient reported a QD.

CONCLUSION

Included GPs and patients agreed only slightly on QD presence although they reported the same amount of QDs; this suggests that GPs and patients see QDs as two different concepts. QD presence had a stronger impact on time to diagnosis when reported by the GP (alone or in agreement with the patient) than when reported by the patient alone. The GP may thus be the most important source of information on QD and diagnostic interval, while the patient information tends to underpin this assessment.

Quality deviations in cancer diagnosis: prevalence and time to diagnosis in general practice

BACKGROUND

High quality in every phase of cancer diagnosis is important to optimise the prognosis for the patient. General practice plays an important role in this phase.

AIM

The aim was to describe the prevalence and the types of quality deviations (QDs) that arise during the diagnostic pathway in general practice as assessed by GPs and to analyse the association between these QDs, the cancer type, and the GP's interpretation of presenting symptoms as well as the influence on the diagnostic interval.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A Danish retrospective cohort study based on questionnaire data from 1466 GPs on 5711 incident patients with cancer identified in the Danish National Patient Registry (response rate = 71.4%). The GP was involved in diagnosing in 4036 cases.

METHOD

Predefined QDs were prompted with the possibility for free text. QD prevalence was estimated as was the association between QDs and diagnosis, the GP's symptom interpretation, and time to diagnosis.

RESULTS

QDs were present for 30.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 29.0 to 31.9) of cancer patients. The most prevalent QD was 'retrospectively, one or more of my clinical decisions were less optimal'. QDs were most prevalent among patients with vague symptoms (24.1% for alarm symptoms versus 39.5% for vague symptoms [P<0.001]). QD presence implied a 41-day (95% CI = 38.4 to 43.6) longer median diagnostic interval.

CONCLUSION

GPs noted at least one QD, which often involved clinical decisions, for one-third of all cancer patients. QDs were more likely among patients with vague symptoms and increased the diagnostic interval considerably.

Factors that influence the recognition, reporting and resolution of incidents related to medical devices and other healthcare technologies: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Medical devices have improved the treatment of many medical conditions. Despite their benefit, the use of devices can lead to unintended incidents, potentially resulting in unnecessary harm, injury or complications to the patient, a complaint, loss or damage. Devices are used in hospitals on a routine basis. Research to date, however, has been primarily limited to describing incidents rates, so the optimal design of a hospital-based surveillance system remains unclear. Our research objectives were twofold: i) to explore factors that influence device-related incident recognition, reporting and resolution and ii) to investigate interventions or strategies to improve the recognition, reporting and resolution of medical device-related incidents.

METHODS

We searched the bibliographic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and PsycINFO database. Grey literature (literature that is not commercially available) was searched for studies on factors that influence incident recognition, reporting and resolution published and interventions or strategies for their improvement from 2003 to 2014. Although we focused on medical devices, other health technologies were eligible for inclusion.

RESULTS

Thirty studies were included in our systematic review, but most studies were concentrated on other health technologies. The study findings indicate that fear of punishment, uncertainty of what should be reported and how incident reports will be used and time constraints to incident reporting are common barriers to incident recognition and reporting. Relevant studies on the resolution of medical errors were not found. Strategies to improve error reporting include the use of an electronic error reporting system, increased training and feedback to frontline clinicians about the reported error.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence on factors influencing medical device-related incident recognition, reporting and resolution by healthcare professionals can inform data collection and analysis in future studies. Since evidence gaps on medical device-related incidents exist, telephone interviews with frontline clinicians will be conducted to solicit information about their experiences with medical devices and suggested strategies for device surveillance improvement in a hospital context. Further research also should investigate the impact of human, system, organizational and education factors on the development and implementation of local medical device surveillance systems.

The impact of a standardized incident reporting system in the perioperative setting: a single center experience on 2,563 'near-misses' and adverse events

Background

The reduction of perioperative harm is a major priority of in-hospital health care and the reporting of incidents and their causes is an important source of information to improve perioperative patient safety. We explored the number, nature and causes of voluntarily reported perioperative incidents in order to highlight the areas where further efforts are required to improve patient safety.

Methods

Data from the Hospital Incident Management System (HIMS), entered in the period from July 2009 to July 2012, were analyzed in a Dutch university hospital. Employees in the perioperatve field filled out a semi-structured digital form of the reporting system. The risk classification of the reported adverse events and ‘near misses’ was based on the estimated patient consequences and the risk of recurrence, according to national guidelines. Predefined reported incident causes were categorized as human, organizational, technical and patient related.

Results

In total, 2,563 incidents (1,300 adverse events and 1,263 ‘near-miss’ events) were reported during 67,360 operations. Reporters were anesthesia, operating room and recovery nurses (37%), ward nurses (31%), physicians (17%), administrative personnel (5%), others (6%) and unmentioned (3%). A total of 414 (16%) adverse events had patient consequences (which affected 0,6% of all surgery patients), estimated as catastrophic in 2, very serious in 34, serious in 105, and marginally serious in 273 cases. Shortcomings in communication was the most frequent reported type of incidents. Non-compliance with Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs: instructions, regulations, protocols and guidelines) was reported with 877 (34%) of incident reports. In total, 1,194 (27%) voluntarily reported causes were SOP-related, mainly human-based (79%) and partially organization-based (21%). SOP-related incidents were not associated with more patient consequences than other voluntarily reported incidents. Furthermore ‘mistake or forgotten’ (15%) and ‘communication problems’ (11%) were frequently reported causes of incidents.

Conclusions

The analysis of voluntarily reported perioperative incidents identified an association between perioperative patient safety problems and human failure, such as SOP non-compliance, mistakes, forgetting, and shortcomings in communication. The data suggest that professionals themselves indicate that SOP compliance in combination with other human failures provide room for improvement.

Incident Learning and Failure-Mode-and-Effects-Analysis Guided Safety Initiatives in Radiation Medicine

By combining incident learning and process failure-mode-and-effects-analysis (FMEA) in a structure-process-outcome framework we have created a risk profile for our radiation medicine practice and implemented evidence-based risk-mitigation initiatives focused on patient safety. Based on reactive reviews of incidents reported in our departmental incident-reporting system and proactive FMEA, high safety-risk procedures in our paperless radiation medicine process and latent risk factors were identified. Six initiatives aimed at the mitigation of associated severity, likelihood-of-occurrence, and detectability risks were implemented. These were the standardization of care pathways and toxicity grading, pre-treatment-planning peer review, a policy to thwart delay-rushed processes, an electronic whiteboard to enhance coordination, and the use of six sigma metrics to monitor operational efficiencies. The effectiveness of these initiatives over a 3-years period was assessed using process and outcome specific metrics within the framework of the department structure. There has been a 47% increase in incident-reporting, with no increase in adverse events. Care pathways have been used with greater than 97% clinical compliance rate. The implementation of peer review prior to treatment-planning and use of the whiteboard have provided opportunities for proactive detection and correction of errors. There has been a twofold drop in the occurrence of high-risk procedural delays. Patient treatment start delays are routinely enforced on cases that would have historically been rushed. Z-scores for high-risk procedures have steadily improved from 1.78 to 2.35. The initiatives resulted in sustained reductions of failure-mode risks as measured by a set of evidence-based metrics over a 3-years period. These augment or incorporate many of the published recommendations for patient safety in radiation medicine by translating them to clinical practice.

Informal learning from error in hospitals: what do we learn, how do we learn and how can informal learning be enhanced? A narrative review

Learning from error is not just an individual endeavour. Organisations also learn from error. Hospitals provide many learning opportunities, which can be formal or informal. Informal learning from error in hospitals has not been researched in much depth so this narrative review focuses on five learning opportunities: morbidity and mortality conferences, incident reporting systems, patient claims and complaints, chart review and prospective risk analysis. For each of them we describe: (1) what can be learnt, categorised according to the seven CanMEDS competencies; (2) how it is possible to learn from them, analysed against a model of informal and incidental learning; and (3) how this learning can be enhanced. All CanMEDS competencies could be enhanced, but there was a particular focus on the roles of medical expert and manager. Informal learning occurred mostly through reflection and action and was often linked to the learning of others. Most important to enhance informal learning from these learning opportunities was the realisation of a climate of collaboration and trust. Possible new directions for future research on informal learning from error in hospitals might focus on ways to measure informal learning and the balance between formal and informal learning. Finally, 12 recommendations about how hospitals could enhance informal learning within their organisation are given.

An inpatient fall prevention initiative in a tertiary care hospital

BACKGROUND

In response to increasing inpatient fall rates, which reached 3.9 falls per 1000 inpatient-days in the last quarter of 2005, Staten Island University Hospital, a 714-bed, tertiary care hospital (Staten Island, New York), implemented a fall prevention initiative (FPI). The initiative was intended to decrease inpatient falls and associated injury by institutionalizing staff safety awareness; accountability, and critical thinking; eradicating historically acceptable system failures; and mandating a critical evaluation of safety precautions and application of fall prevention protocol.

METHODS

The intervention included two phases (1) a review phase, in which existing fall prevention efforts were evaluated, and (2) the FPI implementation phase, in which systems were implemented to ensure fall risk assessments, fall incident investigations, identifying and confronting problem issues, planning and adherence to corrective action, and accountability for missed preventive opportunities. For all 1,098,471 inpatient-days of persons aged 18 years and older, with an admission lasting at least one day, between April 2006 and March 2010, data were collected for inpatient falls and fall-associated injuries per 1000 inpatient-days.

RESULTS

Four-year inpatient fall rates decreased by 63.9% (p < .0001); the greatest reduction (72.3%) occurred between the first quarter (Q1) 2005 and Q4 2009. Minor and moderate fall-related injuries significantly decreased by 54.4% and 64.0%, respectively. Two falls with major injury occurred during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

The FPI was associated with a significant reduction in fall and fall-related injury rates. The results suggest that increasing commitment to continuous quality improvement through enhanced safety awareness and accountability contributed to the initiative's success and led to a change of normative behavior and a culture of safety.

Safety strategies in an academic radiation oncology department and recommendations for action

BACKGROUND

Safety initiatives in the United States continue to work on providing guidance as to how the average practitioner might make patients safer in the face of the complex process by which radiation therapy (RT), an essential treatment used in the management of many patients with cancer, is prepared and delivered. Quality control measures can uncover certain specific errors such as machine dose miscalibration or misalignments of the patient in the radiation treatment beam. However, they are less effective at uncovering less common errors that can occur anywhere along the treatment planning and delivery process, and even when the process is functioning as intended, errors still occur. PRIORITIZING RISKS AND IMPLEMENTING RISK-REDUCTION STRATEGIES: Activities undertaken at the radiation oncology department at the Johns Hopkins Hospital (Baltimore) include Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA), risk-reduction interventions, and voluntary error and near-miss reporting systems. A visual process map portrayed 269 RT steps occurring among four subprocesses-including consult, simulation, treatment planning, and treatment delivery. Two FMEAs revealed 127 and 159 possible failure modes, respectively. Risk-reduction interventions for 15 "top-ranked" failure modes were implemented. Since the error and near-miss reporting system's implementation in the department in 2007, 253 events have been logged. However, the system may be insufficient for radiation oncology, for which a greater level of practice-specific information is required to fully understand each event.

CONCLUSIONS

The "basic science" of radiation treatment has received considerable support and attention in developing novel therapies to benefit patients. The time has come to apply the same focus and resources to ensuring that patients safely receive the maximal benefits possible.

From a blame culture to a just culture in health care

BACKGROUND

A prevailing blame culture in health care has been suggested as a major source of an unacceptably high number of medical errors. A just culture has emerged as an imperative for improving the quality and safety of patient care. However, health care organizations are finding it hard to move from a culture of blame to a just culture.

PURPOSE

We argue that moving from a blame culture to a just culture requires a comprehensive understanding of organizational attributes or antecedents that cause blame or just cultures. Health care organizations need to build organizational capacity in the form of human resource (HR) management capabilities to achieve a just culture.

METHODOLOGY

This is a conceptual article. Health care management literature was reviewed with twin objectives: (a) to ascertain if a consistent pattern existed in organizational attributes that lead to either blame or just cultures and (2) to find out ways to reform a blame culture.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the review of related literature, we conclude that (a) a blame culture is more likely to occur in health care organizations that rely predominantly on hierarchical, compliance-based functional management systems; (b) a just or learning culture is more likely to occur in health organizations that elicit greater employee involvement in decision making; and (c) human resource management capabilities play an important role in moving from a blame culture to a just culture.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Organizational culture or human resource management practices play a critical role in the health care delivery process. Health care organizations need to develop a culture that harnesses the ideas and ingenuity of health care professional by employing a commitment-based management philosophy rather than strangling them by overregulating their behaviors using a control-based philosophy. They cannot simply wish away the deeply entrenched culture of blame nor can they outsource their way out of it. Health care organizations need to build internal human resource management capabilities to bring about the necessary changes in their culture and management systems and to become learning organizations.

Enhancing safety reporting in adult ambulatory oncology with a clinician champion: a practice innovation

This article examines whether a patient safety "champion" on an ambulatory chemotherapy infusion unit can increase reporting of adverse events and close calls. Reporting rates increased substantially on both intervention and control units. It was accompanied by more reports of medical errors and conditions that worried staff and fewer reports of service quality incidents. The facilitated reporting method described here is a novel approach to incident reporting, complements the spontaneous reporting systems used in hospitals and some ambulatory care settings, and may help to build a safety culture. By identifying errors and worrisome conditions, it may help managers identify problems before they lead to harm.

Development of a measure of patient safety event learning responses

OBJECTIVE

To define patient safety event (PSE) learning response and to provide preliminary validation of a measure of PSE learning response.

DATA SOURCES

Ten focus groups with front-line staff and managers, an expert panel, and cross-sectional survey data from patient safety officers in 54 general acute hospitals.

STUDY DESIGN

A mixed methods study to define a measure of learning responses to patient safety failures that is rooted in theory, expert knowledge, and organizational practice realities.

EXTRACTION METHODS

Learning response items developed from the literature were modified and validated in front-line staff and manager focus groups and by an expert panel and second group of external experts. Actual learning responses gleaned from survey data were examined using exploratory factor analyses and reliability analysis.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Unique learning response items were identified for minor, moderate, major events, and major near misses by an expert panel. A two-factor model of major event learning response was identified (factor 1=event analysis, factor 2=dissemination/communication of learnings). Organizations engage in greater learning responses following major events than less severe events and, for major events, organizations engage in more factor 1 responses than factor 2 learning responses.

CONCLUSIONS

Eleven to 13 items can measure learning responses to PSEs of differing severity. The items are feasible, grounded in theory, and reflect expert opinion as well as practice setting realities. The items have the potential for use to assess current practice in organizations and set future improvement goals.

A system analysis of a suboptimal surgical experience

Background

System analyses of incidents that occur in the process of health care delivery are rare. A case study of a series of incidents that one of the authors experienced after routine urologic surgery is presented. We interpret the sequence of events as a case of cascading incidents that resulted in outcomes that were suboptimal, although fortunately not fatal.

Methods

A system dynamics approach was employed to develop illustrative models (flow diagrams) of the dynamics of the patient's interaction with surgery and emergency departments. The flow diagrams were constructed based upon the experience of the patient, chart review, discussion with the involved physicians as well as several physician colleagues, comparison of our diagrams with those developed by the hospital of interest for internal planning purposes, and an iterative process with one of the co-authors who is a system dynamics expert. A dynamic hypothesis was developed using insights gained by building the flow diagrams.

Results

The incidents originated in design flaws and many small innocuous system changes that have occurred incrementally over time, which by themselves may have no consequence but in conjunction with some system randomness can have serious consequences. In the patient's case, the incidents that occurred in preoperative assessment and surgery originated in communication and procedural failures. System delays, communication failures, and capacity issues contributed largely to the subsequent incidents. Some of these issues were controllable by the physicians and staff of the institution, whereas others were less controllable. To the system's credit, some of the more controllable issues were addressed, but systemic problems like overcrowding are unlikely to be addressed in the near future.

Conclusion

This is first instance that we are aware of in the literature where a system dynamics approach has been used to analyze a patient safety experience. The qualitative system dynamics analysis was useful in understanding the system, and contributed to learning on the part of some components of the system. We suggest that further data collection and quantitative analysis would be highly informative for identification of system changes to improve quality and safety.