Search

Background: Achieving people-centred health care systems requires new and innovative strategies to capture information about whether, and to what degree, health care is successful in improving health from the perspective of the patient. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) can bring some of these new insights, and are increasingly used in research, clinical care, and policymaking.Methods: This paper reflects the ongoing discussions and findings of the OECD PaRIS Working Group on Patient-reported Indicators for Mental Health Care.Results: The OECD has been measuring quality of care for mental health conditions over the last 14 years through the Health Care Quality and Outcomes (HCQO) program; nonetheless, information on how persons with mental health problems value the services they receive, and impact of the services, remains limited. As of 2018, a survey from the OECD showed that only five of the twelve countries surveyed (Australia, Israel, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom) reported PROMs and PREMs collection on a regular basis in mental health settings. The paper details some of the challenges specific to the collection and use of PROMs and PREMs in mental health care, and examples from countries which have implemented comprehensive programmes to gather information about PROMs and PREMs for individuals receiving mental health services.Conclusions: Given the health and economic impact of mental ill-health across all OECD countries, there is significant value to being able to assess the quality and outcomes of care in this area using internationally-comparable measures. Continued international harmonisation of PROMs and PREMs for mental health through international coordination is a key way to facilitate the sharing of national experiences, promote the use of PROMs and PREMs, and create meaningful indicators for national and international benchmarking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Achieving people-centred health care systems requires new and innovative strategies to capture information about whether, and to what degree, health care is successful in improving health from the perspective of the patient. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) can bring some of these new insights, and are increasingly used in research, clinical care, and policymaking.Methods: This paper reflects the ongoing discussions and findings of the OECD PaRIS Working Group on Patient-reported Indicators for Mental Health Care.Results: The OECD has been measuring quality of care for mental health conditions over the last 14 years through the Health Care Quality and Outcomes (HCQO) program; nonetheless, information on how persons with mental health problems value the services they receive, and impact of the services, remains limited. As of 2018, a survey from the OECD showed that only five of the twelve countries surveyed (Australia, Israel, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom) reported PROMs and PREMs collection on a regular basis in mental health settings. The paper details some of the challenges specific to the collection and use of PROMs and PREMs in mental health care, and examples from countries which have implemented comprehensive programmes to gather information about PROMs and PREMs for individuals receiving mental health services.Conclusions: Given the health and economic impact of mental ill-health across all OECD countries, there is significant value to being able to assess the quality and outcomes of care in this area using internationally-comparable measures. Continued international harmonisation of PROMs and PREMs for mental health through international coordination is a key way to facilitate the sharing of national experiences, promote the use of PROMs and PREMs, and create meaningful indicators for national and international benchmarking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With this paper, we initiate the Supplement on Deepening our Understanding of Quality in Australia (DUQuA). DUQuA is an at-scale, cross-sectional research programme examining the quality activities in 32 large hospitals across Australia. It is based on, with suitable modifications and extensions, the Deepening our Understanding of Quality improvement in Europe (DUQuE) research programme, also published as a Supplement in this Journal, in 2014. First, we briefly discuss key data about Australia, the health of its population and its health system. Then, to provide context for the work, we discuss previous activities on the quality of care and improvement leading up to the DUQuA studies. Next, we present a selection of key interventional studies and policy and institutional initiatives to date. Finally, we conclude by outlining, in brief, the aims and scope of the articles that follow in the Supplement. This first article acts as a framing vehicle for the DUQuA studies as a whole. Aggregated, the series of papers collectively attempts an answer to the questions: what is the relationship between quality strategies, both hospital-wide and at department level? and what are the relationships between the way care is organised, and the actual quality of care as delivered? Papers in the Supplement deal with a multiplicity of issues including: how the DUQuA investigators made progress over time, what the results mean in context, the scales designed or modified along the way for measuring the quality of care, methodological considerations and provision of lessons learnt for the benefit of future researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Delirium is commonly detected in older people after hip fracture. Delirium is considered to be a multifactorial disorder that is often seen post-operatively (incidence ranging from 35% to 65%). Hospitals in Australia are required to meet eight standards including the comprehensive care standard to be able to maintain their accreditation. The standard includes actions related to falls, pressure injuries, nutrition, mental health, cognitive impairment and end-of-life care. Delirium prevention was identified as an area for improvement in our Orthopaedic unit in a Level 1 University Trauma Centre in Australia. This implementation research project aimed to understand the efficacy of a delirium prevention intervention within an existing orthopaedic speciality care system.Objective: Implementation of the tailored intervention will increase adherence to National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards, thereby reducing rate of delirium.Methods: In this study, we used an interrupted time series design to examine changes in practice over time in people admitted to hospital with a hip fracture. Clinical staff caring for patients with hip fracture in an acute care setting in Adelaide, South Australia, participated in the project. In brief, intervention included education, environmental restructuring, change champions, infographics and audit feedback reports. The primary outcome of interest was rate of delirium. The secondary outcome was compliance with the use of delirium 4AT screening tool, duration of delirium and hospital length of stay.Results: The rate of change per month in patients with delirium decreased significantly by 19.2%. There was no significant change observed in trend for duration of delirium and length of hospital stay between pre-intervention and post-intervention phases. A significant increase in the use of screening tool was observed from 4.7% in the pre-intervention phase to 33.6% in the post-intervention phase.Conclusion: Translation of evidence-based intervention model incorporating well-considered implementation strategies had a mixed impact on decreasing the rate of delirium. The scheduled hospital accreditation enhanced the use of validated screening tool to recognize delirium. This project highlights the importance of aligning implementation goals with the wider goals of the organization as well as making clinicians accountable by consistent auditing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate a technological solution in the form of an App to implement and measure person-centredness in nursing. The focus was to enhance the knowledge transfer of a set of person-centred key performance indicators and the corresponding measurement framework used to inform improvements in the experience of care.Design: The study used an evaluation approach derived from the work of the Medical Research Council to assess the feasibility of the App and establish the degree to which the App was meeting the aims set out in the development phase. Evaluation data were collected using focus groups (n = 7) and semi-structured interviews (n = 7) to capture the impact of processes experienced by participating sites.Setting: The study was conducted in the UK and Australia in two organizations, across 11 participating sites.Participants: 22 nurses from 11 sites in two large health care organizations were recruited on a voluntary basis.Intervention: Implementing the KPIs and measurement framework via the APP through two cycles of data collection.Main Outcome Measures: The main outcome was to establish feasibility in the use of the App.Results: The majority of nurse/midwife participants found the App easy to use. There was broad consensus that the App was an effective method to measure the patient experience and generated clear, concise reports in real time.Conclusions: The implementation of the person-centred key performance indicators using the App enhanced the generation of meaningful data to evidence patient experience across a range of different clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People who live in aged care homes have high rates of illness and frailty. Providing evidence-based care to this population is vital to ensure the highest possible quality of life.Objective: In this study (CareTrack Aged, CT Aged), we aimed to develop a comprehensive set of clinical indicators for guideline-adherent, appropriate care of commonly managed conditions and processes in aged care.Methods: Indicators were formulated from recommendations found through systematic searches of Australian and international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Experts reviewed the indicators using a multiround modified Delphi process to develop a consensus on what constitutes appropriate care.Results: From 139 CPGs, 5609 recommendations were used to draft 630 indicators. Clinical experts (n = 41) reviewed the indicators over two rounds. A final set of 236 indicators resulted, mapped to 16 conditions and processes of care. The conditions and processes were admission assessment; bladder and bowel problems; cognitive impairment; depression; dysphagia and aspiration; end of life/palliative care; hearing and vision; infection; medication; mobility and falls; nutrition and hydration; oral and dental care; pain; restraint use; skin integrity and sleep.Conclusions: The suite of CT Aged clinical indicators can be used for research and assessment of the quality of care in individual facilities and across organizations to guide improvement and to supplement regulation or accreditation of the aged care sector. They are a step forward for Australian and international aged care sectors, helping to improve transparency so that the level of care delivered to aged care consumers can be rigorously monitored and continuously improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Clinical registry participation is a measure of healthcare quality. Limited knowledge exists on Australian hospitals' participation in clinical registries and whether this registry data informs quality improvement initiatives. Objective To identify participation in clinical registries, determine if registry data inform quality improvement initiatives, and identify registry participation enablers and clinicians' educational needs to improve use of registry data to drive practice change. Methods A self-administered survey was distributed to staff coordinating registries in seven hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. Eligible registries were international-, national- and state-based clinical, condition-/disease-specific and device/product registries. Results Response rate was 70% (97/139). Sixty-two (64%) respondents contributed data to 46 eligible registries. Registry reports were most often received by nurses (61%) and infrequently by hospital executives (8.4%). Less than half used registry data 'always' or 'often' to influence practice improvement (48%) and care pathways (49%). Protected time for data collection (87%) and benchmarking (79%) were 'very likely' or 'likely' to promote continued participation. Over half 'strongly agreed' or 'agreed' that clinical practice improvement training (79%) and evidence–practice gap identification (77%) would optimize use of registry data. Conclusions Registry data are generally only visible to local speciality units and not routinely used to inform quality improvement. Centralized on-going registry funding, accessible and transparent integrated information systems combined with data informed improvement science education could be first steps to promote quality data-driven clinical improvement initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laboratory testing forms an important part of diagnostic investigation in modern medicine; however, the overuse of 'routine blood tests' can result in significant potential harm and financial cost to the patient and the healthcare system. In 2018, a new protocol targeting the ordering of investigations was implemented within the General Surgical Teams of Wollongong Hospital in New South Wales, an Australian tertiary referral hospital, to reduce the number of 'routine blood tests' as a quality improvement initiative.Objective: To identify whether there was a reduction in the number of 'routine blood tests' and associated costs following implementation of the new protocol.Methods: The protocol involved regular review of the laboratory investigations being ordered for the following day with a senior team member. The medical records of all patients admitted under the general surgery service at Wollongong Hospital were retrospectively reviewed over two 10-week periods in 2017 and 2018 (control and study, respectively). The casemix was categorized into Minor, Intermediate, Major or Unscored, depending on case complexity coding.Results: A total of 838 patients were identified during the control period (2017) and 805 patients were identified during the study period (2018). Ten thousand and thirty tests were included in the control period, compared to 8610 over the study period, resulting in a 16% (or greater) reduction in 'routine blood tests' per patient, per day of admission and a 6% reduction in costs in the study group (P < 0.001).Conclusion: Targeted ordering of investigations with personalized education and feedback to junior staff during review of clinical status of each patient as a part of normal workflow can reduce inappropriate ordering of 'routine blood tests' and associated costs to the patient and the healthcare system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: COVID-19 pandemic has had a major impact globally, with older people living in aged care homes suffering high death rates.Objectives: We aimed to compare the impact of initial government policies on this vulnerable older population between the UK and Australia during the first wave of attack.Methods: We searched websites of governments in the UK and Australia and media outlets. We examined the key policies including the national lockdown dates and the distribution of some important resources (personal protective equipment and testing) and the effects of these initial policies on the mortality rates in the aged care homes during the first wave of attack of COVID-19.Results: We found that both countries had prioritized resources to hospitals over aged care homes during the first wave of attack. Both countries had lower priority for aged care residents in hospitals (e.g. discharging without testing for COVID-19 or discouraging admissions). However, deaths in aged care homes were 270 times higher in the UK than in Australia as on 7 May 2020 (despite UK having a population only 2.5 times larger than Australia). The lower fatality rate in Australia may have been due to the earlier lockdown strategy when the total daily cases were low in Australia (118) compared to the UK (over 1000), as well as the better community viral testing regime in Australia.Conclusion: In conclusion, the public health policy in Australia aimed towards earlier intervention with earlier national lockdown and more viral testing to prevent new cases. This primary prevention could have resulted in more lives being saved. In contrast, the initial policy in the UK focussed mainly on protecting resources for hospitals, and there was a delay in national lockdown intervention and lower viral testing rate, resulting in more lives lost in the aged care sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To explore differences in position emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) service provision internationally to further understand the impact variation may have upon cancer services. To identify areas of further exploration for researchers and policymakers to optimize PET-CT services and improve the quality of cancer services.Design: Comparative analysis using data based on pre-defined PET-CT service metrics from PET-CT stakeholders across seven countries. This was further informed via document analysis of clinical indication guidance and expert consensus through round-table discussions of relevant PET-CT stakeholders. Descriptive comparative analyses were produced on use, capacity and indication guidance for PET-CT services between jurisdictions.Setting: PET-CT services across 21 jurisdictions in seven countries (Australia, Denmark, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK).Participants: None.Intervention(s): None.Main Outcome Measure(s): None.Results: PET-CT service provision has grown over the period 2006-2017, but scale of increase in capacity and demand is variable. Clinical indication guidance varied across countries, particularly for small-cell lung cancer staging and the specific acknowledgement of gastric cancer within oesophagogastric cancers. There is limited and inconsistent data capture, coding, accessibility and availability of PET-CT activity across countries studied.Conclusions: Variation in PET-CT scanner quantity, acquisition over time and guidance upon use exists internationally. There is a lack of routinely captured and accessible PET-CT data across the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership countries due to inconsistent data definitions, data linkage issues, uncertain coverage of data and lack of specific coding. This is a barrier in improving the quality of PET-CT services globally. There needs to be greater, richer data capture of diagnostic and staging tools to facilitate learning of best practice and optimize cancer services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medication errors (MEs) are among the most common types of incidents reported in Australian and international hospitals. There is no uniform method of reporting and reducing these errors. This study aims to identify the incidence, time trends, types and factors associated with MEs in a large regional hospital in Australia.Methods: A 5-year cross-sectional study.Results: The incidence of MEs was 1.05 per 100 admitted patients. The highest frequency of errors was observed during the colder months of May-August. When distributed by day of the week, Mondays and Tuesdays had the highest frequency of errors. When distributed by hour of the day, time intervals from 7 am to 8 am and from 7 pm to 8 pm showed a sharp increase in the frequency of errors. One thousand and eighty-eight (57.8%) MEs belonged to incidence severity rating (ISR) level 4 and 787 (41.8%) belonged to ISR level 3. There were six incidents of ISR level 2 and only one incident of ISR level 1 reported during the five-year period 2014-2018. Administration-only errors were the most common accounting for 1070 (56.8%) followed by prescribing-only errors (433, 23%). High-risk medications were associated with half the number of errors, the most common of which were narcotics (17.9%) and antimicrobials (13.2%).Conclusions: MEs continue to be a problem faced by international hospitals. Inexperience of health professionals and nurse-patient ratios might be the fundamental challenges to overcome. Specific training of junior staff in prescribing and administering medication and nurse workload management could be possible solutions to reducing MEs in hospitals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Healthcare accreditation surveyors are well positioned to gain access to hospitals and apply their existing data collection skills to research. Consequently, we contracted and trained a surveyor cohort to collect research data for the Deepening our Understanding of Quality in Australia (DUQuA) project. The aim of this study is to explore and compare surveyors' perceptions and experiences in collecting quality and safety data for accreditation and for health services research.Design: A qualitative, comparative study.Setting and Participants: Ten surveyors participated in semi-structured interviews, which were audio recorded, transcribed and coded using Nvivo11. Interview transcripts of participants were analysed thematically and separately, providing an opportunity for comparison and for identifying common themes and subthemes.Intervention(s): None.Main Outcome Measure(s): Topics addressed data collection for healthcare accreditation and research, including preparation and training, structure, organization, attitudes and behaviours of staff and perceptions of their role.Results: Five themes and ten subthemes emerged from the interviews: (1) overlapping facilitators for accreditation and research data collection, (2) accreditation-specific facilitators, (3) overlapping barriers for accreditation and research data collection, (4) research data collection-specific barriers and (5) needs and recommendations. Subthemes were (1.1) preparation and training availability, (1.2) prior knowledge and experiences; (2.1) ease of access, (2.2) high staff engagement, (3.1) time, (4.1) poor access and structure, (4.2) lack of staff engagement, (4.3) organizational changes; (5.1) short-notice accreditation and (5.2) preparation for future research.Conclusions: Although hospital accreditation and research activities require different approaches to data collection, we found that suitably trained accreditation surveyors were able to perform both activities effectively. The barriers surveyors encountered when collecting data for research provide insight into the challenges that may be faced when visiting hospitals for short-notice accreditation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Little is known about the influence that hospital quality systems have on quality at department level, in Australia and elsewhere. This study assessed the relationships between organizational-level quality management systems, and the extent to which hospital-level quality management systems and department-level quality management strategies are related.Design: A multi-level, cross-sectional, mixed-method study.Setting and Participants: As part of the Deepening our Understanding of Quality in Australia (DUQuA) project, we invited all large hospitals in Australia (~200 or more beds) which provided acute myocardial infarction (AMI), hip fracture and stroke care. The quality managers of these hospitals were the respondents for one of seven measures of hospital quality management systems and strategies. Data across the six remaining measures were collected through site visits by external surveyors assessing the participating hospitals.Main Outcome Measures: Relationships were assessed between three organization-level quality management system measures: a self-report measure assessing organization-level quality activities (quality management systems index, QMSI); externally assessed organization-level compliance to procedures used to plan, monitor and improve quality of care (quality management compliance index, QMCI); and externally assessed implementation of quality systems (clinical quality implementation index, CQII). Associations were also assessed between organization-level quality management systems and department-level quality management strategies: how clinical responsibilities are assigned for a particular condition; whether department organization processes are organized to facilitate evidence-based care recommendations; compliance with selected recommendations of international agencies; and whether clinical reviews are performed systematically.Results: Of 78 invited hospitals, 32 participated in the study. QMSI was positively associated with QMCI and CQII, but after controlling for QMSI, no relationship was found between QMCI and CQII. There appears to be a cluster of relationships between QMSI and department-level measures, but this was not consistent across all departments.Conclusion: This is the first national study undertaken in Australia to assess relationships within and between organization-level and department-level quality management systems. These quality management system tools align with many components of accreditation standards and may be useful for hospitals in continuously monitoring and driving improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Deepening our Understanding of Quality in Australia (DUQuA) project is a multisite, multi-level, cross-sectional study of 32 of the largest hospitals in Australia. This overview examines relationships between (i) organization-level quality management systems and department-level quality management strategies and (ii) patient-level measures (clinical treatment processes, patient-reported perceptions of care and clinical outcomes) within Australian hospitals.Design: We examined hospital quality improvement structures, processes and outcomes, collecting data at organization, department and patient levels for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), hip fracture and stroke. Data sources included surveys of quality managers, clinicians and patients, hospital visits, medical record reviews and national databases. Outcomes data and patient admissions data were analysed. Relationships between measures were evaluated using multi-level models. We based the methods on the Deepening our Understanding of Quality Improvement in Europe (DUQuE) framework, extending that work in parts and customizing the design to Australian circumstances.Setting, Participants and Outcome Measures: The 32 hospitals, containing 119 participating departments, provided wide representation across metropolitan, inner and outer regional Australia. We obtained 31 quality management, 1334 clinician and 857 patient questionnaires, and conducted 2401 medical record reviews and 151 external assessments. External data via a secondary source comprised 14 460 index patient admissions across 14 031 individual patients. Associations between hospital, Emergency Department (ED) and department-level systems and strategies and five patient-level outcomes were assessed: 19 of 165 associations (11.5%) were statistically significant, 12 of 79 positive associations (15.2%) and 7 of 85 negative associations (8.2%).Results: We did not find clear relationships between hospital-level quality management systems, ED or department quality strategies and patient-level outcomes. ED-level clinical reviews were related to adherence to clinical practice guidelines for AMI, hip fracture and stroke, but in different directions. The results, when considered alongside the DUQuE results, are suggestive that front line interventions may be more influential than department-level interventions when shaping quality of care and that multi-pronged strategies are needed. Benchmark reports were sent to each participating hospital, stimulating targeted quality improvement activities.Conclusions: We found no compelling relationships between the way care is organized and the quality of care across three targeted patient-level outcome conditions. The study was cross-sectional, and thus we recommend that the relationships studied should be assessed for changes across time. Tracking care longitudinally so that quality improvement activities are monitored and fed back to participants is an important initiative that should be given priority as health systems strive to develop their capacity for quality improvement over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This final article in our 12-part series articulating a suite of quality improvement studies completes our report on the Deepening our Understanding of Quality in Australia (DUQuA) program of work. Here, we bring the Supplement's key findings and contributions together, tying up loose ends. Traversing the DUQuA articles, we first argued the case for the research, conducted so that an in-depth analysis of one country's health system, completed 5 years after the landmark Deepening our Understanding of Quality Improvement in Europe (DUQuE), was available. We now provide a digest of the learning from each article. Essentially, we have contributed an understanding of quality and safety activities in 32 of the largest acute settings in Australia, developed a series of scales and tools for use within Australia, modifiable for other purposes elsewhere, and provided a platform for future studies of this kind. Our main message is, despite the value of publishing an intense study of quality activities in 32 hospitals in one country, there is no gold standard, one-size-fits-all methodology or guarantee of success in quality improvement activities, whether the initiatives are conducted at departmental, organization-wide or whole-of-systems levels. Notwithstanding this, armed with the tools, scales and lessons from DUQuA, we hope we have provided many more options and opportunities for others going about strengthening their quality improvement activities, but we do not claim to have solved all problems or provided a definitive approach. In our view, quality improvement initiatives are perennially challenging, and progress hard-won. Effective measurement, evaluating progress over time, selecting a useful suite of quality methods and having the persistence to climb the improvement gradient over time, using all the expertise and tools available, is at the core of the work of quality improvement and will continue to be so. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to use routinely collected electronic medicines administration (eMAR) data in residential aged care (RAC) to investigate the quality use of medicines.Design: A cross-sectional analysis of eMAR data.Setting: 71 RAC facilities in New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory, Australia.Participants: Permanent residents living in a participating facility on 1 October 2015.Intervention: None.Main Outcome Measures: Variation in polypharmacy (≥5 medications), hyper-polypharmacy (≥10 medications) and antipsychotic use across facilities was examined using funnel plot analysis.Results: The study dataset included 4775 long-term residents. The mean resident age was 85.3 years and 70.6% of residents were female. The median facility size was 60 residents and 74.3% were in metropolitan locations. 84.3% of residents had polypharmacy, 41.2% hyper-polypharmacy and 21.0% were using an antipsychotic. The extent of polypharmacy (69.75-100% of residents), hyper-polypharmacy (38.81-76.19%) and use of antipsychotic medicines (0-75.6%) varied considerably across the 71 facilities.Conclusions: Using eMAR data we found substantial variation in polypharmacy, hyper-polypharmacy and antipsychotic medicine use across 71 RAC facilities. Further investigation into the policies and practices of facilities performing above or below expected levels is warranted to understand variation and drive quality improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the impact of the adaptation of an existing electronic referral application for use in antimicrobial stewardship prospective audit and feedback rounds (antimicrobial rounds).Design: Retrospective, single-centre observational study between March 2015 and February 2016.Setting: A new quaternary referral centre.Study Participants: Adults referred for antimicrobial rounds outside of the intensive care and haematology units.Intervention: Adaptation of an electronic referral application used by medical and allied health staff. A questionnaire-style referral form was designed to capture patient clinical details using a combination of free text and dropdown menus. Clinical pharmacists were educated and granted access to the system.Main Outcome Measures: The proportion of completed electronic referrals of total round reviews by month for the 12 months after implementation. The time from request to completion of reviews. The impact on adherence to advice provided on rounds. The impact on the institutional usage of broad-spectrum antibiotics: glycopeptides, carbapenems, third and fourth generation cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones and piperacillin/tazobactam.Results: Over the study period, the proportion of electronic referrals of completed antimicrobial round reviews increased from 59% to 88% (P < 0.001); 75.7% of accepted electronic referrals were seen within 48 h of request. The proportion of advice ignored fell from 18% to 8.5% (P < 0.001). Piperacillin/tazobactam, fluoroquinolone and glycopeptide usage decreased.Conclusions: The adaptation of an electronic referral application for antimicrobial rounds was associated with increased adherence to advice and reduction in use in target antibiotics. Our model is now used at other institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of the study was to develop and test an instrument, underpinned by a recognized theoretical framework, that examines how staff perceive person-centred practice, using proven methods of instrument design and psychometric analysis.Design: The study used a mixed method multiphase research design involving: two Delphi studies to agree definitions and items to measure the constructs aligned to the person-centred practice theoretical framework (Phase 1); and a large-scale quantitative cross-sectional survey (Phase 2).Setting: Phase 1 was an international study involving representatives from seven countries across Europe and Australia, with Phase 2 conducted in one country across five organizations.Participants: Two international panels of experts (n = 33) in person-centred practice took part in the Delphi study and a randomly selected sample of registered nurses (n = 703, 23.8%) drawn from across a wide range of clinical settings completed the Person-centred Practice Inventory - Staff (PCPI-S).Main Outcome Measures: The main outcome is to establish a measure of staff perceptions of person-centred Practice.Results: Broad consensus on definitions relating to 17 constructs drawn from a person-centred practice framework was achieved after two rounds; likewise with the generation of 108 items to measure the constructs; a final instrument comprising 59 items with proven psychometric properties was achieved.Conclusions: The PCPI-S is psychometrically acceptable instrument validated by an international expert panel that maps specifically to a theoretical framework for person-centred practice and provides a generic measure of person-centredness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of International Journal for Quality in Health Care is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of International Journal for Quality in Health Care is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: To examine how consumer engagement (CE) can be promoted through Australian accreditation programmes.Design: A nation-wide qualitative study completed in 2012.Setting: All eight Australian States and Territories.Participants: Two-hundred and fifty-eight healthcare stakeholders from the acute, primary and aged care sectors.Intervention: Forty-seven individual and group interviews were undertaken. Questions elicited views on the dimensions and utility of CE promotion by accreditation programmes.Main Outcome Measure: Healthcare stakeholders' views on the dimensions and utility of CE promotion by accreditation programmes.Results: Four mechanisms of CE promotion were identified. Two involved requirements for health service organizations to meet CE-related standards related to consumer experience and satisfaction surveys, and consumer participation in organizational governance processes. Two mechanisms for promoting CE through accreditation processes were also identified, concerning consumer participation in the development and revision of standards, and the implementation of accreditation surveys. Accreditation programmes were viewed as important drivers of CE, yet concerns were raised regarding the organizational investments needed to meet programmes' requirements.Conclusions: Accreditation programmes use diverse mechanisms as levers for change to promote CE in healthcare. These mechanisms and their inter-relationships require careful consideration by accreditation agencies and health policymakers to maximize their potential benefits, while maintaining stakeholder engagement in programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Early detection of patient deterioration and prevention of adverse events are key challenges to patient safety. This study investigated clinical staff perceptions of current monitoring practices and the planned introduction of continuous monitoring devices on general wards.Design: Multi-method study comprising structured surveys, in-depth interviews and device trial with log book feedback.Setting: Two general wards in a large urban teaching hospital in Sydney, Australia.Participants: Respiratory and neurosurgery nursing staff and two doctors.Results: Nurses were confident about their abilities to identify patients at risk of deterioration, using a combination of vital signs and visual assessment. There were concerns about the accuracy of current vital signs monitoring equipment and frequency of intermittent observation. Both the nurses and the doctors were enthusiastic about the prospect of continuous monitoring and perceived it would allow earlier identification of patient deterioration; provide reassurance to patients; and support interdisciplinary communication. There were also reservations about continuous monitoring, including potential decrease in bedside nurse-patient interactions; increase in inappropriate escalations of patient care; and discomfort to patients.Conclusions: While continuous monitoring devices were seen as a potentially positive tool to support the identification of patient deterioration, drawbacks, such as the potential for reduced patient contact, revealed key areas that will require close surveillance following the implementation of devices. Training and improved interdisciplinary communication were identified as key requisites for successful implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of International Journal for Quality in Health Care is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of International Journal for Quality in Health Care is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of International Journal for Quality in Health Care is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)