Involving patients in patient safety programmes: A scoping review and consensus procedure by the LINNEAUS collaboration on patient safety in primary care

Patient and family engagement in patient safety in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Patients can play a key role in delivering safe care by becoming actively involved in their health care. This study aimed at reviewing the literature for evidence of patients' and families' engagement in patient safety in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR).

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of the literature published in English using PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and PsycINFO until June 2023.

RESULTS

A total of 9019 studies were screened, with 22 meeting the inclusion criteria. Our review found few published studies of patient and family engagement in patient safety research in the EMR. Thirteen studies explored the attitudes, perceptions, and/or experiences / preferences of patients, families, and healthcare providers (HCPs) regarding patient engagement in patient safety. Nine publications reported patient involvement in patient safety activities at varying levels. Three categories of factors were identified that may affect patient involvement: patient-related (e.g., lack of awareness on their role in preventing harms, unwillingness to challenge HCPs' authority, and cultural barriers); HCP-related (e.g., negative attitudes towards patient engagement, poor patient-provider communication, and high workload); and healthcare setting-related (e.g., lack of relevant policies and guidelines, lack of training for patients, and HCPs, and lack of patient-centered approach).

CONCLUSION

This review highlighted limitations in the current literature on patient and family engagement in patient safety in the EMR, including both the depth of evidence and clarity of concepts. Further research is needed to explore how to actively involve patients and their families, as well as to determine whether such involvement translates into improved safety in practice.

Embedding Patient-Centricity by Collaborating with Patients to Transform the Rare Disease Ecosystem

What is patient-centricity? In some contexts, it has been associated with targeting therapies based on biomarkers or enabling healthcare access. There has been a surge in patient-centricity publications, and in many cases for the biopharmaceutical industry, patient engagement is used to endorse pre-held assumptions at a specific moment in time. Rarely is patient engagement used to drive business decisions. Here we describe an innovative partnership between Alexion, AstraZeneca Rare Disease and patients that allowed a deeper understanding of the biopharmaceutical stakeholder ecosystem and an empathic understanding of each patient's and caregiver's lived experience. Alexion's decision to build patient-centricity frameworks resulted in the formation of two unique organisation design platforms: STAR (Solutions To Accelerate Results for patients) and LEAP (Learn, Evolve, Activate and deliver for Patients) Immersive Simulations. These interconnected programmes required cultural, global, and organisational shifts. STAR generates global patient insights that are embedded in drug candidate and product strategies while helping to establish enterprise foundational alignment and external stakeholder engagement plans. LEAP Immersive Simulations produce detailed country-level patient and stakeholder insights that contribute to an empathetic understanding of each patient's lived experience, support country medicine launches and provide ideas to have a positive impact along the patient journey. Combined, they deliver integrated, cross-functional insights, patient-centric decision making, an aligned patient journey, and 360° stakeholder activation. Throughout these processes, the patient is empowered to dictate their needs and validate the proposed solutions. This is not a patient engagement survey. This is a partnership where the patient co-authors strategies and solutions.

Person-centered care approach to prevention and management of falls among adults and aged in a Brazilian hospital: a best practice implementation project

OBJECTIVES

The objective is to assess compliance with evidence-based criteria regarding a person-centered care approach to the prevention and management of falls among adults and the elderly in a Brazilian private hospital.

METHODS

This project used the JBI audit and feedback method to implement evidence into practice. The JBI Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System and Getting Research into Practice audit tools have been used to promote changes in oncology and medical-surgical wards. The implementation protocol was designed based on the primary barriers and facilitators identified in the baseline audit, along with a training program and changes in the electronic medical records. Nursing documentation available in medical records, interviews with nurses who worked in oncology and medical-surgical wards, and interviews with patients admitted in oncology and medical-surgical wards were used to assess the baseline and follow-up audit compliance rates.

RESULTS

The baseline and follow-up audits showed improvement for criteria 3 and 9 (100%) and criteria 6 and 7 (97%), respectively. The compliance for criteria 4 (97.6%), 5 (76.7%), and 8 (18%) showed slight variations from baseline and follow-up audits. Compliance for criteria 1 (76.9%) and 2 (63.3%) decreased in the follow-up audit.

CONCLUSION

These findings support that baseline, and follow-up audits allied to a fall training program and changes in the electronic nursing records increase the compliance rates related to evidence-based practice regarding a person-centered care approach to preventing and managing falls. We will implement new strategies according to the best practices to achieve better outcomes.

How to engage patients in achieving patient safety: A qualitative study from healthcare professionals' perspective

All parties involved in health care, including patients and their families/caregivers play a significant role to achieve patient safety. Furthermore, patient engagement (PE) has not been adequately implemented to achieve safe healthcare in Indonesia, despite the introduction of the patient-centered care paradigm. This study aims to explore healthcare professionals' (HCPs) perspectives on PE and its application technique. A qualitative study was conducted in the chronic wards of a faith-based private hospital in Yogyakarta Province, Indonesia. Four focus group discussions among 46 HCPs, followed by 16 in-depth interviews, were carried out. Furthermore, the verbatim transcripts were subjected to thematic analysis. The result showed four main themes, including PE as a strategy for achieving safe healthcare, factors affecting its implementation, the need for comprehensive strategies to engage the patients, and their roles in safety efforts. Furthermore, the implementation of PE can be enhanced by encouraging healthcare professionals (HCPs) to play proactive roles in empowering recipients. To achieve PE, "partnership culture" and the removal of potential barriers as well as determining factors, must be established. This requires a high-level commitment, organizational support with a top-down approach, and integration into healthcare systems. In conclusion, PE is essential for patient safety and can be enhanced by strengthening organization support, integrating into the healthcare system, improving HCPs' roles, and empowering patients and caregivers to overcome potential barriers.

Questionnaires Measuring Patient Participation in Patient Safety-a systematic review

AIM

The purpose of this review was to evaluate the content, validity and reliability of patient-reported questionnaires on patient participation in patient safety.

BACKGROUND

Patient participation in patient safety is one of the key strategies that are increasingly regarded as a critical intervention to improve the quality of safety care.

EVALUATION

A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. The content, reliability and validity of patient-reported questionnaires on patient participation in patient safety were assessed.

KEY ISSUES

Twenty-seven studies were included for data extraction and synthesis. The questionnaire contents most commonly used to describe patient participation in patient safety were 'attitudes and perceptions', 'experience', 'information and feedback' and 'willingness'. Internal consistency was evaluated for seventeen questionnaires, and test-retest reliability was tested for four questionnaires. Content validity was assessed among all included questionnaires, and structural validity was evaluated for twelve questionnaires.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research targeting the different safety issues is still indispensable for developing patient-reported questionnaires with great psychometric quality in validity, reliability, feasibility and usability in patient participation in patient safety.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT

Clinical nurses should consider the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, content validity and structural validity of the questionnaires that have been positively appraised for methodological quality before use.

Development and validation of patients' surgical safety checklist

Background

Poor uptake and understanding of critical perioperative information represent a major safety risk for surgical patients. Implementing a patient-driven surgical safety checklist might enhance the way critical information is given and increase patient involvement in their own safety throughout the surgical pathway. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a Surgical Patient Safety Checklist (PASC) for use by surgical patients.

Method

This was a prospective study, involving patient representatives, multidisciplinary healthcare professionals and elective surgical patients to develop and validate PASC using consensus-building techniques in two Norwegian hospitals. A set of items intended for PASC were rated by patients and then submitted to Content Validation Index (CVI) analyses. Items of low CVI went through a Healthcare Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (HFMEA) Hazard Scoring process, as well as a consensus process before they were either kept or discarded. Reliability of patients’ PASC ratings was assessed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient analysis. Lastly, the face validity of PASC was investigated through focus group interviews with postoperative patients.

Results

Initial development of PASC resulted in a checklist consisting of two parts, one before (32 items) and one after surgery (26 items). After achieving consensus on the PASC content, 215 surgical patients from six surgical wards rated the items for the CVI analysis on a 1-4 scale and mostly agreed on the content. Five items were removed from the checklist, and six items were redesigned to improve PASCs’ user-friendliness. The total Scale-level index/Average (S-CVI/Ave) before revision was 0.83 and 0.86 for pre- and post-operative PASC items, respectively. Following revision, these increased to 0.86 and 0.93, respectively. The PASC items reliability score was 0.97 (95% confidence interval 0.96 to 0.98). The qualitative assessment identified that patients who used PASC felt more in control of their situation; this was achieved when PASC was given to them at what they felt was the right time and healthcare professionals took part in its usage.

Conclusion

Multidisciplinary perioperative care staff and surgical patients agreed upon PASC content, the checklist ratings were reliable, and qualitative assessment suggested good face validity. PASC appears to be a usable and valid checklist for elective surgical patients across specialties.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07470-z.

Involvement of companions in patient safety in pediatric and neonatal units: scope review

ABSTRACT Objectives: to describe scientific evidence on the involvement of companions in patient safety, from their own perspective and health professionals’ perspective in neonatal and pediatric units. Methods: scoping review carried out according to The Joanna Briggs Institute’s recommendations, in eight databases, following the Preferred Reporting Items checklist for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist, between 2011 and 2021. Results: the 13 studies included highlighted the importance of companions’ involvement in patient safety and the prevention of adverse events. However, they pointed out failures in communication and weakness in the training of professionals, which were obstacles to their involvement. The strengthening of health education, multidisciplinary rounds and educational technologies were highlighted as strategies to expand the involvement of companions. Final Considerations: this study directs elements for health professionals and managers to rethink the companions’ role in patient safety and development of collective strategies.

Patient-completed safety checklists as an empowerment tool for patient involvement in patient safety: concepts, considerations and recommendations

The application of safety checklists to healthcare settings to help systematise routines and improve communication between healthcare professionals has proven to be effective in reducing errors, complications, mortality and hospitalisation time. There is a new call to extend the checklist concept to develop safety checklists that can be used by patients to help empower their involvement in safety practices. Only a handful of studies around patient-completed checklists exist, but those that do indicate a positive impact on patient empowerment and involvement in safety-related behaviours. In this article, we present the concept of patient-completed checklists and provide a review of the existing evidence, highlighting important design and implementation considerations, and making recommendations for future research and development.

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.

Validation and initial results of surveys exploring perspectives on risks and solutions for diagnostic and medication errors in primary care in Sweden

OBJECTIVE

To (1) validate and (2) display initial results of surveys to health care professionals and patients on the importance and mitigation of specified risks for diagnostic and medication errors.

DESIGN

For validation, psychometric properties were analysed by assessment of construct validity and internal consistency by factor analysis. Non-parametric analyses were used concerning areas of risk, and top ranking of solutions were reported descriptively.

SETTING

Primary health care in Sweden.

PARTICIPANTS

Health care professionals (HCPs); including physicians, nurses and practice managers, as well as patients who had experienced diagnostic or medication errors.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Psychometric properties of the surveys. Median ratings for risks and top rankings of solutions for professionals and patients.

RESULTS

There were 939 respondents to the HCP survey. Construct validity resulted in a model with four dimensions: Patient-provider level; Support systems for every day clinical work; Shared information and cooperation between different caregivers; Risks in the environment. Internal consistency was acceptable with Cronbach's α values above 0.7. Confirmatory factor analysis generally showed an acceptable fit. Initial results from the professionals showed the importance of continuity of care, a nationwide on-line medical platform and cooperation in transfer of care. The patient survey could not be validated because of low response rate.

CONCLUSION

The HCP survey showed some contradicting results regarding model fit and may be tentatively acceptable but validity needs further study. HCP survey answers indicated that relational continuity of care and a nationwide on-line medical platform are highly valued. Current awareness Health care professionals and patients are rather untapped sources of knowledge regarding patient safety in primary health care Main statements Validation is performed on a new survey capturing rating of risks and solutions. The validation of the health care professional survey is tentatively acceptable. Survey answers indicate that health care professionals' and patients' perspectives are complementary.

Evaluation of a Patient-Centered Fall-Prevention Tool Kit to Reduce Falls and Injuries: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial

IMPORTANCE

Falls represent a leading cause of preventable injury in hospitals and a frequently reported serious adverse event. Hospitalization is associated with an increased risk for falls and serious injuries including hip fractures, subdural hematomas, or even death. Multifactorial strategies have been shown to reduce falls in acute care hospitals, but evidence for fall-related injury prevention in hospitals is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether a fall-prevention tool kit that engages patients and families in the fall-prevention process throughout hospitalization is associated with reduced falls and injurious falls.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This nonrandomized controlled trial using stepped wedge design was conducted between November 1, 2015, and October 31, 2018, in 14 medical units within 3 academic medical centers in Boston and New York City. All adult inpatients hospitalized in participating units were included in the analysis.

INTERVENTIONS

A nurse-led fall-prevention tool kit linking evidence-based preventive interventions to patient-specific fall risk factors and designed to integrate continuous patient and family engagement in the fall-prevention process.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the rate of patient falls per 1000 patient-days in targeted units during the study period. The secondary outcome was the rate of falls with injury per 1000 patient-days.

RESULTS

During the interrupted time series, 37 231 patients were evaluated, including 17 948 before the intervention (mean [SD] age, 60.56 [18.30] years; 9723 [54.17%] women) and 19 283 after the intervention (mean [SD] age, 60.92 [18.10] years; 10 325 [53.54%] women). There was an overall adjusted 15% reduction in falls after implementation of the fall-prevention tool kit compared with before implementation (2.92 vs 2.49 falls per 1000 patient-days [95% CI, 2.06-3.00 falls per 1000 patient-days]; adjusted rate ratio 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.96; P = .01) and an adjusted 34% reduction in injurious falls (0.73 vs 0.48 injurious falls per 1000 patient-days [95% CI, 0.34-0.70 injurious falls per 1000 patient-days]; adjusted rate ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53-0.88; P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this nonrandomized controlled trial, implementation of a fall-prevention tool kit was associated with a significant reduction in falls and related injuries. A patient-care team partnership appears to be beneficial for prevention of falls and fall-related injuries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02969343.

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.

The impact of person-centred care on patient safety: An umbrella review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Nursing literature frequently emphasises the benefits of person-centred approaches for healthcare quality and safety.

OBJECTIVE

This umbrella review aimed to synthesise the combined evidence from systematic reviews assessing the impact of person-centred care interventions on patient safety.

DESIGN

A three-step review process included a preliminary review of literature, a comprehensive search, and manual searching of reference lists and forward citations of selected reviews. The review protocol was registered with Prospero (CRD42018090048).

DATA SOURCES

Reviewers searched 10 databases for systematic reviews published in English-language peer-reviewed journals between 2000 and 2019: Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, JBI Database, Medline, ProQuest Health & Medicine, PROSPERO Register, PubMed and Scopus.

REVIEW METHODS

Covidence software was used to manage screening and eligibility. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, reviewed full texts of articles for eligibility, and appraised the quality of reviews using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses.

RESULTS

From an initial total of 3412 potential titles, 16 reviews met the inclusion criteria. The selected reviews examined the impact of person-centred care for diverse groups of patients (children, adults and older people) in varied settings. Most systematic reviews assessed experimental studies, generally comparing person-centred interventions with 'usual care', often demonstrating limited evidence of impact on safety. Reviews addressed several patient safety outcomes relevant to nursing, including falls, infections, medication use and misuse, and mortality rates. The systematic reviews were generally well conducted, although several included studies of poor or fair quality. Given the heterogeneity of the interventions, outcomes and research designs of studies included in the selected reviews, we were unable to draw unequivocal conclusions about the implications of person-centred care for patient safety in this umbrella review. However, there was some encouraging evidence that person-centred care initiatives may result in reduced rates of falls (in acute care and residential aged care settings). The review also highlighted reductions in agitation for people with dementia and some improvement in anti-psychotic medication use in older people with dementia.

CONCLUSIONS

Although abundant evidence exists demonstrating the positive effects of person-centred care on healthcare quality and on patient (and provider) wellbeing, there is little research focussing specifically on the impact of person-centred care on patient safety. Thus, there is scope for further high-quality nursing research into how person-centred interventions improve specific patient safety outcomes in order to inform more widespread adoption of person-centred practice.

Patient and provider perspectives on reducing risk of harm in primary health care: a qualitative questionnaire study in Sweden

Objective: To explore how patients, that had experienced harm in primary care, and how primary providers and practice managers understood reasons for harm and possibilities to reduce risk of harm.Design: Inductive qualitative analysis of structured questionnaires with free text answers.Setting: Primary health care in Sweden.Patients/subjects: Patients (n = 22) who had experienced preventable harm in primary health care, and primary care providers and practice managers, including 15 physicians, 20 nurses and 24 practice managers.Main outcome measures: Categories and overarching themes from the qualitative analysis.Results: The three categories identified as important for safety were continuity of care, communication and competence. With flaws in these, risks were thought to be greater and if these were strengthened the risks could be reduced. The overarching theme for the patient was the experience of being neglected, like not having been properly examined. The overarching theme for primary care providers and practice managers was lack of continuity of care.Conclusion: Primary care providers, practice managers and patients understood the risks and how to reduce the risks of patient safety problems as related to three main categories: continuity of care, communication and competence. Future work towards a safer primary health care could therefore benefit from focusing on these areas.Key pointsCurrent awareness:  • Patients and primary care providers are rather untapped sources of knowledge regarding patient safety in primary health care.Main statements:  • Patients understood the risk of harm as stemming from that they were not properly examined.  • Primary care providers understood the risk of harm to a great extent as stemming from poor continuity of care.  • Patients, primary care providers and practice managers believed continuity, communication and competence play an important role in reducing risks.

Patients' and healthcare workers' recommendations for a surgical patient safety checklist - a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Patients' involvement in patient safety has increased in healthcare. Use of checklists may improve patient outcome in surgery, though few have attempted to engage patients' use of surgical checklist. To identify risk elements of complications based on patients' and healthcare workers' experiences is warranted. This study aims to identify what the patients and healthcare workers find to be the risk elements that should be included in a patient-driven surgical patient safety checklist.

METHOD

A qualitative study design where post-operative patients, surgeons, ward physicians, ward nurses, and secretaries from five surgical specialties took part in focus group interviews. Eleven focus groups were conducted including 25 post-operative patients and 27 healthcare workers at one tertiary teaching hospital and one community hospital in Norway. Based on their experiences, participants were asked to identify perceived risks before and after surgery. The interviews were analysed using content analysis.

RESULTS

Safety risk factors were categorised as pre-operative information: pre-operative preparations, post-operative information, post-operative plans and follow-up. The subcategories under pre-operative information and preparations were: contact information, medication safety, health status, optimising health, dental status, read information, preparation two weeks before surgery, inform your surgical ward, planning your own discharge, preparation on admission and just before surgery. The subcategories under post-operative information, further plans and follow-up were: prevention and complications, restriction and activity, medication safety, pain relief, stomach functions, further care and appointments. Both healthcare workers and patients express the need for a surgical patient safety checklist.

CONCLUSION

A broad spectre of risk elements for a patient safety checklist were identified. Developing a surgical safety checklist based on these risk elements might reduce complications and unwanted errors.

TRAIL REGISTRATION

The study is registered as part of a clinical trial in ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03105713.

Development and evaluation of an intervention based on the provision of patient feedback to improve patient safety in Spanish primary healthcare centres: study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Despite the enormous potential for adverse events in primary healthcare (PHC), the knowledge about how to improve patient safety in this context is still sparse. We describe the methods for the development and evaluation of an intervention targeted at PHC professionals to improve patient safety in Spanish PHC centres.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The intervention will consist in using the patient reported experiences and outcomes of safety in primary care (PREOS-PC) survey to gather patient-reported experiences and outcomes concerning the safety of the healthcare patients receive in their PHC centres, and feed that information back to the PHC professionals to help them identify opportunities for safer healthcare provision. The study will involve three stages. Stage 1 (developing the intervention) will involve: (i) qualitative study with 40 PHC providers to optimise the acceptability and perceived utility of the proposed intervention; (ii) Spanish translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the PREOS-PC survey; (iii) developing the intervention components; and (iv) developing an online tool to electronically administrate PREOS-PC and automatically generate feedback reports to PHC centres. Stage 2 (piloting the intervention) will involve a 3-month feasibility (one group pre-post) study in 10 PHC centres (500 patients, 260 providers). Stage 3 (evaluating the intervention) will involve: (i) a 12-month, two-arm, two-level cluster randomised controlled trial (1248 PHC professionals within 48 PHC centres; with randomisation at the centre level in a 1:1 ratio) to evaluate the impact of the intervention on patient safety culture (primary outcome), patient-reported safety experiences and outcomes (using the PREOS-PC survey), and avoidable hospitalisations; (ii) qualitative study with 20 PHC providers to evaluate the acceptability and perceived utility of the intervention and identify implementation barriers.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Balearic Islands (CEI IB: 3686/18) with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments. The results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03837912; pre-results.

The development and psychometric testing of Inpatients' Involvement in Medication Safety Scale (IIMSS)

AIM

To develop and test the psychometric characteristics of the Inpatients' Involvement in Medication Safety Scale.

BACKGROUND

Medication safety is the third biggest challenge threatening patient safety. Patient involvement in medication safety management is essential, and however, few tools have been developed to assess the related process.

METHODS

The scale was formulated through literature review, semi-structured interviews and Delphi expert consultation. A group of 461 inpatients from a tertiary hospital were selected to examine the reliability and validity of the scale.

RESULTS

The scale consisted of three dimensions and 23 items. Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.916 for the total scale and was 0.777-0.858 for three subscales; the test-retest reliability was 0.742 for the total scale. The content validity was 0.957, and the item content validity ranged from 0.833 to 1.000. The cumulative variance contribution of three selected factors was 51.19%.

CONCLUSIONS

The Inpatients' Involvement in Medication Safety Scale has good reliability and validity and can be used to evaluate inpatients' involvement in medication safety.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT

The scale provides theoretical reference for clinical nursing safety management, as well as helps nurses to provide targeted medication care for patients and their families.

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.

Rural general practice patients' coping with hazards and harm: an interview study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to identify and analyse rural general practice patients' experiences of hazards and harm that comprise adverse events, and their strategies for coping with them.

DESIGN

Interview study using systematic text condensation and coping strategy theory in an abductive analysis process.

SETTING

Nine rural general practice clinics in Norway.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty participants, aged 21-79 years, all presenting with recent onset of somatic and/or psychiatric complaints.

RESULTS

Participating rural general practice patients described their experiences of a variety of hazards and harms. Their three most discussed cognitive and behavioural coping strategies were: (1) to accept the events; (2) to confront them and (3) to engage in planful problem-solving. While the participants demonstrated a tendency toward accepting hazards and harm that their regular general practitioner created, they were often willing to confront those that locum (ie, substitute) general practitioners created. Participants used planful problem-solving in situations they deemed hazardous, such as breaches of confidentiality or not being taken seriously, as well as during potential/actual emergencies.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients at rural general practice clinics actively identify and respond to hazards and harm, applying three coping strategies. Thus, patients themselves may serve as an important safety barrier against hazards and harm; their potential contributions to improving patient safety must be appreciated accordingly and reflected in future research as well as in everyday clinical practice.

Diagnostic errors reported in primary healthcare and emergency departments: A retrospective and descriptive cohort study of 4830 reported cases of preventable harm in Sweden

Background: Diagnostic errors are a major patient safety concern in primary healthcare and emergency care. These settings involve a high degree of uncertainty regarding patients' diagnoses and appear to be those most prone to diagnostic errors. Diagnostic errors comprise missed, delayed, or incorrect diagnoses preventing the patient from receiving correct and timely treatment. Data regarding which diagnoses are affected in these settings are scarce. Objectives: To understand the distribution of diagnoses among reported diagnostic errors in primary health and emergency care as a step towards creating countermeasures for safer care. Methods: A retrospective and descriptive cohort study investigating reported diagnostic errors. A nationwide cohort was collected from two databases. The study was performed in Sweden from 1 January 2011 until 31 December 2016. The setting was primary healthcare and emergency departments. Results: In total, 4830 cases of preventable harm were identified. Of these, 2208 (46%) were due to diagnostic errors. Diagnoses affected in primary care were cancer (37% and 23%, respectively, in the two databases; mostly colon and skin), fractures (mostly hand), heart disease (mostly myocardial infarction), and rupture of tendons (mostly Achilles). Of the diagnostic errors in the emergency department, fractures constituted 24% (mostly hand and wrist, 29%). Rupture/injury of muscle/tendon constituted 19% (mostly finger tendons, rotator cuff tendons, and Achilles tendon). Conclusion: Our findings show that the most frequently missed diagnoses among reported harm were cancers in primary care and fractures in the emergency departments.

Evaluation of Patient and Family Engagement Strategies to Improve Medication Safety

BACKGROUND

Patient and family engagement (PFE) is critical for patient safety. We systematically reviewed types of PFE strategies implemented and their impact on medication safety.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, reference lists and websites to August 2016. Two investigators independently reviewed all abstracts and articles, and articles were additionally reviewed by two senior investigators for selection. One investigator abstracted data and two investigators reviewed the data for accuracy. Study quality was determined by consensus. Investigators developed a framework for defining the level of patient engagement: informing patients about medications (Level 1), informing about engagement with health care providers (Level 2), empowering patients with communication tools and skills (Level 3), partnering with patients in their care (Level 4), and integrating patients as full care team members (Level 5).

RESULTS

We included 19 studies that mostly targeted older adults taking multiple medications. The median level of engagement was 2, ranging from 2-4. We identified no level 5 studies. Key themes for patient engagement strategies impacting medication safety were patient education and medication reconciliation, with a subtheme of patient portals. Most studies (84%) reported implementation outcomes. The most commonly reported medication safety outcomes were medication errors, including near misses and discrepancies (47%), and medication safety knowledge (37%). Most studies (63%) were of medium to low quality, and risk of bias was generally moderate. Among the 11 studies with control groups, 55% (n = 6) reported statistically significant improvement on at least one medication safety outcome. Further synthesis of medication safety measures was limited due to intervention and outcome heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Key strategies for engaging patients in medication safety are education and medication reconciliation. Patient engagement levels were generally low, as defined by a novel framework for determining levels of patient engagement. As more patient engagement studies are conducted, this framework should be evaluated for associations with patient outcomes.

Influences on the adoption of patient safety innovation in primary care: a qualitative exploration of staff perspectives

Background

Primary care is changing rapidly to meet the needs of an ageing and chronically ill population. New ways of working are called for yet the introduction of innovative service interventions is complicated by organisational challenges arising from its scale and diversity and the growing complexity of patients and their care. One such intervention is the multi-strand, single platform, Patient Safety Toolkit developed to help practices provide safer care in this dynamic and pressured environment where the likelihood of adverse incidents is increasing. Here we describe the attitudes of staff toward these tools and how their implementation was shaped by a number of contextual factors specific to each practice.

Methods

The Patient Safety Toolkit comprised six tools; a system of rapid note review, an online staff survey, a patient safety questionnaire, prescribing safety indicators, a medicines reconciliation tool, and a safe systems checklist. We implemented these tools at practices across the Midlands, the North West, and the South Coast of England and conducted semi-structured interviews to determine staff perspectives on their effectiveness and applicability.

Results

The Toolkit was used in 46 practices and a total of 39 follow-up interviews were conducted. Three key influences emerged on the implementation of the Toolkit these related to their ease of use and the novelty of the information they provide; whether their implementation required additional staff training or practice resource; and finally factors specific to the practice’s local environment such as overlapping initiatives orchestrated by their CCG.

Conclusions

The concept of a balanced toolkit to address a range of safety issues proved popular. A number of barriers and facilitators emerged in particular those tools that provided relevant information with a minimum impact on practice resource were favoured. Individual practice circumstances also played a role. Practices with IT aware staff were at an advantage and those previously utilising patient safety initiatives were less likely to adopt additional tools with overlapping outputs. By acknowledging these influences we can better interpret reaction to and adoption of individual elements of the toolkit and optimise future implementation.

Patient safety culture in care homes for older people: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

In recent years, there has been an increasing focus on the role of safety culture in preventing incidents such as medication errors and falls. However, research and developments in safety culture has predominantly taken place in hospital settings, with relatively less attention given to establishing a safety culture in care homes. Despite safety culture being accepted as an important quality indicator across all health and social care settings, the understanding of culture within social care settings remains far less developed than within hospitals. It is therefore important that the existing evidence base is gathered and reviewed in order to understand safety culture in care homes.

METHODS

A scoping review was undertaken to describe the availability of evidence related to care homes' patient safety culture, what these studies focused on, and identify any knowledge gaps within the existing literature. Included papers were each reviewed by two authors for eligibility and to draw out information relevant to the scoping review.

RESULTS

Twenty-four empirical papers and one literature review were included within the scoping review. The collective evidence demonstrated that safety culture research is largely based in the USA, within Nursing Homes rather than Residential Home settings. Moreover, the scoping review revealed that empirical evidence has predominantly used quantitative measures, and therefore the deeper levels of culture have not been captured in the evidence base.

CONCLUSIONS

Safety culture in care homes is a topic that has not been extensively researched. The review highlights a number of key gaps in the evidence base, which future research into safety culture in care home should attempt to address.

A developed model of cancer patients participation in intravenous chemotherapy safety

How to reduce intravenous chemotherapy-related adverse reactions of cancer patients is one focus of clinical work. Nowadays, patient for patient safety (PFPS) is an important component of hospital safety management and can contribute to a reduction in the rate of adverse events following intravenous chemotherapy of cancer patients. To guide and evaluate cancer patients participate in intravenous chemotherapy, we explored a scientific and practical model of cancer patients participation in intravenous chemotherapy safety. which can also guide nurse practitioners (NPs) practice. Based on a literature review and analysis of chemotherapy-associated adverse events from two large comprehensive hospitals, combined with the existing strategies for PFPS, the model of cancer patients participation in intravenous chemotherapy safety was drafted. Then we conducted two rounds of the Delphi-method questionnaire to revise the model. The two rounds Delphi questionnaire survey had a response rate of 82.36%. The authoritative coefficient was 0.87 and the coordination coefficients were 0.165 and 0.214, respectively. The proposed safety model included 3 first-order indicators, 8 second-order indicators, and 41 third-order indicators, including content of patients participation, responsibilities of medical personnel to assist cancer patients participation, and suggestions for guaranteeing implementation. Many NPs practice in a medical setting where cancer patients for patient safety behavior are blurred. The model of cancer patients participation in intravenous chemotherapy safety can guide NPs in their practice of promoting PFPS among cancer patients intravenous chemotherapy.

Identifying patient-centred recommendations for improving patient safety in General Practices in England: a qualitative content analysis of free-text responses using the Patient Reported Experiences and Outcomes of Safety in Primary Care (PREOS-PC) questionnaire

BACKGROUND

There is a growing interest in identifying strategies to achieve safer primary health-care provision. However, most of the research conducted so far in this area relies on information supplied by health-care providers, and limited attention has been paid to patients' perspectives.

OBJECTIVE

To explore patients' experiences and perceptions of patient safety in English general practices with the aim of eliciting patient-centred recommendations for improving patient safety.

METHODS

The Patient Reported Experiences and Outcomes of Safety in Primary Care questionnaire was sent to a random sample of 6736 primary care users registered in 45 English practices. We conducted a qualitative content analysis of responses to seven open-ended items addressing patients' experiences of safety problems, lessons learnt as a result of such experiences and recommendations for safer health care.

RESULTS

A total of 1244 (18.4%) participants returned completed questionnaires. Of those, 678 (54.5%) responded to at least one open-ended question. Two main themes emerged as follows: (i) experiences of safety problems and (ii) good practices and recommendations to improve patient safety in primary care. Most frequent experiences of safety problems were related to appointments, coordination between providers, tests, medication and diagnosis. Patients' responses to these problems included increased patient activation (eg speaking up about concerns with their health care) and avoidance of unnecessary health care. Recommendations for safer health care included improvements in patient-centred communication, continuity of care, timely appointments, technical quality of care, active monitoring, teamwork, health records and practice environment.

CONCLUSION

This study identified a number of patient-centred recommendations for improving patient safety in English general practices.

Results of a population-based-assessment: we need better communication and more profound patient involvement

Background

In Austria several regulations were published in order to support initiatives to increase patient safety. Since then, many patient safety projects were implemented in Austrian hospitals; therefore, it was the aim of the current survey to examine the perceptions of Austrian citizens with respect to topics relevant to patient safety.

Methods

Between 8 and 22 October 2015 a qualitative cross-sectional telephone interview study was performed. A sample of citizens above 14 years of age was randomly drawn. The survey contained 6 questions. In each of the nine states of Austria, a representative number of citizens were interviewed.

Results

In total 1021(female: 52.3%) telephone interviews were performed and 249 (24.7%) citizens stated that trust/confidence in patient safety is very high, 571 (55.9%) assessed the reputation of a hospital as very important and 739 (72.4%) stated that a detailed explanation of the treatment as well as information on associated risk factors and possibilities of further treatments is very important. Of the respondents 722 (70.7%) stated that patient safety measures in a given hospital are very important, 807 (79.0%) stated that it is important to be informed about patient safety measures and 547 (53.6%) stated that if something did not satisfactorily function they would complain to the hospital. Significant differences occurred for states with and without university hospitals.

Conclusion

The results of the survey give cause for concern as the majority of interviewed citizens have medium or low trust/confidence in patient safety. Furthermore, more than two-thirds of Austrian citizens revealed that detailed explanation of treatment, information on associated risk factors, information about patient safety measures to predict medical errors and information about patient safety measures which are in place in a hospital are very important. The study showed that patient safety is an important topic for Austrian citizens and they want to be informed and involved. The study also indicated the need to promote patient safety aspects and to decrease the number of people who are not confident concerning patient safety in Austrian hospitals.

Developing a research agenda for patient safety in primary care. Background, aims and output of the LINNEAUS collaboration on patient safety in primary care

This paper is an introduction to a supplement to The European Journal of General Practice, bringing together a body of research focusing on the issue of patient safety in relation to primary care. The supplement represents the outputs of the LINNEAUS collaboration on patient safety in primary care, which was a four-year (2009-2013) coordination and support action funded under the Framework 7 programme by the European Union. Being a coordination and support action, its aim was not to undertake new research, but to build capacity through engaging primary care researchers and practitioners in identifying some of the key challenges in this area and developing consensus statements, which will be an essential part in developing a future research agenda. This introductory article describes the aims of the LINNEAUS collaboration, provides a brief summary of the reasons to focus on patient safety in primary care, the epidemiological and policy considerations, and an introduction to the papers included in the supplement.