Search

Background: When a patient is discharged from hospital it is essential that their general practitioner (GPs) and community pharmacist are informed of changes to their medicines. This necessitates effective communication and information-sharing between hospitals and primary care clinicians., Objective: To identify priority medicine handover issues and solutions to inform the co-design and development of a multifaceted intervention., Method: A modified nominal group technique was used to reach consensus on medicine handover priority areas. The first hour of an interactive 2-hr workshop focused on ranking pre-identified issues drawn from literature. In the second hour, participants identified solutions that they then ranked from highest to lowest priority through an online platform. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse workshop data., Results: In total 32 participants attended the workshop including hospital doctors ( n  = 8, 25.0%), GPs and hospital pharmacists ( n  = 6 each, 18.8%), consumers and community pharmacists ( n  = 4 each, 12.5%), and both hospital and aged care facility nurses ( n  = 2 each 6.3%). From the list of 23 issues, the highest ranked issue was high workload and time pressures impacting the discharge process (22/32). From the list of 36 solutions, the participants identified two solutions that were equally ranked highest (12/27 each). They were mandating that patients leave hospital with a discharge summary, including medication reconciliation information and, developing an integrated information technology system where medication summary and notes are accessible for primary, secondary and tertiary health provider ., Conclusion: The consensus process highlighted challenges in hospital procedures where potential solutions may be implemented through co-design of a multifaceted intervention to improve medicine handover quality., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Introduction: At least 10% of hospital admissions in high-income countries, including Australia, are associated with patient safety incidents, which contribute to patient harm ('adverse events'). When a patient is seriously harmed, an investigation or review is undertaken to reduce the risk of further incidents occurring. Despite 20 years of investigations into adverse events in healthcare, few evaluations provide evidence of their quality and effectiveness in reducing preventable harm.This study aims to develop consistent, informed and robust best practice guidance, at state and national levels, that will improve the response, learning and health system improvements arising from adverse events., Methods and Analysis: The setting will be healthcare organisations in Australian public health systems in the states of New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory. We will apply a multistage mixed-methods research design with evaluation and in-situ feasibility testing. This will include literature reviews (stage 1), an assessment of the quality of 300 adverse event investigation reports from participating hospitals (stage 2), and a policy/procedure document review from participating hospitals (stage 3) as well as focus groups and interviews on perspectives and experiences of investigations with healthcare staff and consumers (stage 4). After triangulating results from stages 1-4, we will then codesign tools and guidance for the conduct of investigations with staff and consumers (stage 5) and conduct feasibility testing on the guidance (stage 6). Participants will include healthcare safety systems policymakers and staff (n=120-255) who commission, undertake or review investigations and consumers (n=20-32) who have been impacted by adverse events., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval has been granted by the Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (2023/ETH02007 and 2023/ETH02341).The research findings will be incorporated into best practice guidance, published in international and national journals and disseminated through conferences., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Australian cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention guidelines recommend absolute CVD risk assessment, but less than half of eligible patients have the required risk factors recorded due to fragmented implementation over the last decade. Co-designed decision aids for general practitioners (GPs) and consumers have been developed that improve knowledge barriers to guideline-recommended CVD risk assessment and management. This study used a stakeholder consultation process to identify and pilot test the feasibility of implementation strategies for these decision aids in Australian primary care., Methods: This mixed methods study included: (1) stakeholder consultation to map existing implementation strategies (2018-20); (2) interviews with 29 Primary Health Network (PHN) staff from all Australian states and territories to identify new implementation opportunities (2021); (3) pilot testing the feasibility of low, medium, and high resource implementation strategies (2019-21). Framework Analysis was used for qualitative data and Google analytics provided decision support usage data over time., Results: Informal stakeholder discussions indicated a need to partner with existing programs delivered by the Heart Foundation and PHNs. PHN interviews identified the importance of linking decision aids with GP education resources, quality improvement activities, and consumer-focused prevention programs. Participants highlighted the importance of integration with general practice processes, such as business models, workflows, medical records and clinical audit software. Specific implementation strategies were identified as feasible to pilot during COVID-19: (1) low resource: adding website links to local health area guidelines for clinicians and a Heart Foundation toolkit for primary care providers; (2) medium resource: presenting at GP education conferences and integrating the resources into audit and feedback reports; (3) high resource: auto-populate the risk assessment and decision aids from patient records via clinical audit software., Conclusions: This research identified a wide range of feasible strategies to implement decision aids for CVD risk assessment and management. The findings will inform the translation of new CVD guidelines in primary care. Future research will use economic evaluation to explore the added value of higher versus lower resource implementation strategies., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Safe medication management is a cornerstone of nursing practice. Nurses prepare patients for discharge which includes the ongoing safe administration of medications. Medication reconciliation at hospital discharge is an interprofessional activity that helps to identify and rectify medication discrepancies or errors to ensure the accuracy and completeness of discharge medications and information. Nurses have a role in medication safety; however, their involvement in medication reconciliation at hospital discharge is poorly described. The study's aim was to describe acute care nurses' perceptions of their roles and responsibilities in medication reconciliation at hospital discharge, including barriers and enablers., Design: Using focus groups, this exploratory descriptive study gathered qualitative data from nurses working in five acute care clinical units (medical, surgical and transit/discharge lounge) at a tertiary Australian hospital. The data were analysed using inductive content analysis and reported following the COREQ checklist., Results: Thirty-two nurses were recruited. Three themes emerged from the data: nurses' medication reconciliation role involves chasing, checking and educating; burden of undertaking medication reconciliation at hospital discharge; team collaboration and communication in medication reconciliation., Conclusions: Nurses had a minor role in medication reconciliation at hospital discharge due to a lack of organisation clinical practice guidance and specialised training. Standardising interprofessional medication reconciliation processes and increasing nurses' involvement will help to streamline this task, reduce discharge delays, workload pressure and improve patient safety., Relevance to Clinical Practice: Medication reconciliation at hospital discharge is an interprofessional patient safety activity, however little is known about nurse's role and responsibilities. This study reports nurses' important contribution to patient safety in terms of healthcare team coordination, medication checking and patient education. Supportive organisations and collaborative teams increased nurses' willingness to complete this activity., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Nursing published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: Patient decision aids (DA) facilitate shared decision making, but implementation remains a challenge. This study tested the feasibility of integrating a cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention DA into general practice software., Methods: We developed a desktop computer application (app) to auto-populate a CVD prevention DA from general practice medical records. 4 practices received monthly practice reports from July-Nov 2021, and 2 practices use the app with limited engagement. CVD risk assessment data and app use were monitored., Results: The proportion of eligible patients with complete CVD risk assessment data ranged from 59 to 94%. Monthly app use ranged from 0 to 285 sessions by 13 individual practice staff including GPs and nurses, with staff using the app an average of 67 sessions during the study period. High users in the 5-month study period continued to use the app for 10 months. Low use was attributed to reduced staff capacity during COVID-19 and technical issues., Conclusion: High users sustained interest in the app, but additional strategies are required for low users. The study will inform implementation plans for new guidelines., Innovation: This study showed it is feasible to integrate patient decision aids with Australian general practice software, despite the challenges of COVID-19 at the time of the study., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© 2023 Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background and Objectives: Primary health networks (PHNs) are tasked with supporting quality improvement in general practice. Traditional methods to do this are labour intensive and lack impact measurement. We aimed to measure general practitioner (GP) response rates to computer decision support at the point of care., Method: Gold Coast PHN developed a decision support tool to deliver real-time medication safety alerts and prompts for interventions and record the GP intervention in 80 general practices covering 519,000 patients., Results: From July 2020 to June 2021, there were 3153 alerts triggered for 2328 patients, with 1250 of the suggested interventions being done (40%). From January 2021 to June 2021, 19,019 prompts were triggered during a visit for 17,398 patients, with 5444 of the suggested interventions being done (22%)., Discussion: Our findings suggest that GPs respond to automated, real-time medication safety alerts and care prompts that are specific to individual patient need without the need for intensive PHN input.

Background: Since the inception of PHNs in Australia, their role in implementing chronic disease prevention activities in general practice has been unclear. This study aimed to qualitatively explore the views of PHN staff on the role of PHNs in promoting prevention, with a focus on cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention., Methods: Content analysis of PHN Needs Assessments was conducted to inform interview questions. Twenty-nine semi-structured interviews were conducted with 32 PHN staff, between June and December 2020, in varied roles across 18 PHNs in all Australian states and territories. Transcribed audio recordings were thematically coded, using the Framework Analysis method to ensure rigour., Results: We identified three main themes: (a) Informal prevention: All respondents agreed the role of PHNs in prevention was indirect and, for the most part, outside the formal remit of PHN Key Performance Indicators (KPIs.) Prevention activities were conducted in partnership with external stakeholders, professional development and quality improvement programs, and PHN-funded data extraction and analysis software for general practice. (b) Constrained by financial incentives: Most interviewees felt the role of PHNs in prevention was contingent on the financial drivers provided by the Commonwealth government, such as Medicare funding and national quality improvement programs. (c) Shaped through competing priorities: The role of PHNs in prevention is a function of competing priorities. There was strong agreement amongst participants that the myriad competing priorities from government and local needs assessments impeded prevention activities., Conclusions: PHNs are well-positioned to foster prevention activities in general practice. However, we found that PHNs role in prevention activities was informal, constrained by financial incentives and shaped through competing priorities. Prevention can be improved through a more explicit prevention focus at the Commonwealth government level. To optimise the role of PHNs, therefore, requires prioritising prevention, aligning it with KPIs and supporting stakeholders like general practice., (© 2021 Australian Health Promotion Association.)

Background: Diagnostic error is a global patient safety priority., Objectives: To estimate the incidence, origins and avoidable harm of diagnostic errors in English general practice. Diagnostic errors were defined as missed opportunities to make a correct or timely diagnosis based on the evidence available (missed diagnostic opportunities, MDOs)., Method: Retrospective medical record reviews identified MDOs in 21 general practices. In each practice, two trained general practitioner reviewers independently conducted case note reviews on 100 randomly selected adult consultations performed during 2013-2014. Consultations where either reviewer identified an MDO were jointly reviewed., Results: Across 2057 unique consultations, reviewers agreed that an MDO was possible, likely or certain in 89 cases or 4.3% (95% CI 3.6% to 5.2%) of reviewed consultations. Inter-reviewer agreement was higher than most comparable studies (Fleiss' kappa=0.63). Sixty-four MDOs (72%) had two or more contributing process breakdowns. Breakdowns involved problems in the patient-practitioner encounter such as history taking, examination or ordering tests (main or secondary factor in 61 (68%) cases), performance and interpretation of diagnostic tests (31; 35%) and follow-up and tracking of diagnostic information (43; 48%). 37% of MDOs were rated as resulting in moderate to severe avoidable patient harm., Conclusions: Although MDOs occurred in fewer than 5% of the investigated consultations, the high numbers of primary care contacts nationally suggest that several million patients are potentially at risk of avoidable harm from MDOs each year. Causes of MDOs were frequently multifactorial, suggesting the need for development and evaluation of multipronged interventions, along with policy changes to support them., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objective Reducing the number of adverse patient safety incidents (PSIs) requires careful monitoring and active management processes. However, there is limited information about the association between hospital settings and the type of PSI. The aims of this study were to describe the severity, nature and characteristics of PSIs from an analysis of their incidence and to assess the relationships between the type of PSI and its setting. Methods A retrospective audit of a clinical incident management system database was conducted for a tertiary health service in Australia with 620000 residents. Records of PSIs reported for patients between 1 July 2017 and 30 June 2018 with Safety Assessment Codes (SAC) of PSIs were extracted from the clinical incident management system and analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. PSIs involving paediatrics, mental health and primary care were excluded. Results In all, 4385 eligible PSIs were analysed: 24 SAC1, 107 SAC2 and 4254 SAC3 incidents. Across reported PSIs, the most common incidents related to skin injury (28.6%), medication (23.2%), falls (19.9%) and clinical process (8.5%). Falls were reported significantly more often in the medical division (χ2=43.85, P<0.001), whereas skin injury incidents were reported significantly more often in the surgical division (χ2=22.56, P<0.001). Conclusions A better understanding of the nature of PSIs and where they occur may lead to more targeted quality improvement strategies. What is known about this topic? Improving patient safety requires effective safety learning systems, which include incident reporting and management processes. Although incident reporting systems typically underestimate the incidence of iatrogenic harm, they do provide valuable opportunities to improve the future safety of health care. What does this paper add? This study reports the extent and severity of different types of PSIs that typically occur in a large tertiary hospital in Australia. The most common types of incidents are skin injury, falls, medication errors and clinical process. There are empirical associations between the type of PSI and clinical division (medical, surgical). What are the implications for practitioners? A greater understanding of the types of PSI and the settings in which they occur may inform the development of more targeted quality improvement strategies that potentially reduce their incidence.

Background and Objectives: General practitioners (GPs) require accurate medication information to care for recently discharged hospital patients. Pre-discharge medication reconciliation improves the accuracy of patient medication lists that GPs receive. This study aimed to explore GPs' perceptions of the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of hospital discharge medication information, and how they undertake medication reconciliation., Method: Using a cross-sectional online survey, quantitative and qualitative data were collected from a convenience sample of GPs practising across the Gold Coast, Australia. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and content analysis., Results: Twelve GPs were recruited. Patient hospital discharge medication information was mostly accurate and complete, but delays in receiving this information affected the ability of GPs to undertake medication reconciliation., Discussion: Receiving accurate and timely patient discharge medication information can reduce errors. Optimising the communication of medication information to GPs may improve patient safety.

Background: Inadequate checking of safety-critical issues can compromise care quality in general practice (GP) work settings. Adopting a systemic, methodical approach may lead to improved standardisation of processes and reliability of task performance, strengthening the safety systems concerned. This study aimed to revise, modify and test the content and relevance of a previously validated safety checklist to the current GP context., Methods: A multimethod study was undertaken in Scottish GP involving: consensus building workshops with users and 'experts' to revise checklist content; regional testing of the modified checklist and follow-up usability evaluation survey of users. Quantitative data underwent descriptive statistical analyses and selected survey free-text comments are presented., Results: A redesigned checklist tool consisting of eight themes (eg, medication safety) and 61 items (eg, out-of-date stock is appropriately disposed) was agreed by 53 users/experts with items reclassified as: mandatory (n=25), essential (n=24) and advisory (n=12). Totally 42/55 GPs tested the tool and submitted checklist data (76.4%). The mean aggregated results demonstrated 92.0% compliance with all 61 checklist items (range: 83.0%-98.0%) and 25/42 GP managers responded to the survey (59.5%) and reported high mean levels of agreement on the usefulness of the checklist (77.0%), ease of use (89.0%), learnability (94.0%) and satisfaction (78.4%)., Conclusions: The checklist was comprehensively redesigned as a practical safety monitoring and improvement tool for potential implementation in Scottish GP. Testing and evaluation demonstrated high levels of checklist content compliance and strong usability feedback, but some variation was evident indicating room for improvement in current safety-critical checking processes. The checklist should be of interest in similar GP settings internationally and to other areas of primary care practice., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To assess quality of care for children presenting with acute abdominal pain using validated indicators., Design: Audit of care quality for acute abdominal pain according to 21 care quality indicators developed and validated in four stages., Setting and Participants: Medical records of children aged 1-15 years receiving care in 2012-2013 were sampled from 57 general practitioners, 34 emergency departments (ED) and 28 hospitals across three Australian states; 6689 medical records were screened for visits for acute abdominal pain and audited by trained paediatric nurses., Outcome Measures: Adherence to 21 care quality indicators and three bundles of indicators: bundle A-History; bundle B-Examination; bundle C-Imaging., Results: Five hundred and fourteen children had 696 visits for acute abdominal pain and adherence was assessed for 9785 individual indicators. The overall adherence was 69.9% (95% CI 64.8% to 74.6%). Adherence to individual indicators ranged from 21.6% for assessment of dehydration to 91.4% for appropriate ordering of imaging. Adherence was low for bundle A-History (29.4%) and bundle B-Examination (10.2%), and high for bundle C-Imaging (91.4%). Adherence to the 21 indicators overall was significantly lower in general practice (62.7%, 95% CI 57.0% to 68.1%) compared with ED (86.0%, 95% CI 83.4% to 88.4%; p<0.0001) and hospital inpatient settings (87.9%, 95% CI 83.1% to 91.8%; p<0.0001)., Conclusions: There was considerable variation in care quality for indicator bundles and care settings. Future work should explore how validated care quality indicator assessments can be embedded into clinical workflows to support continuous care quality improvement., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Variable and poor care quality are important causes of preventable patient harm. Many patients receive less than recommended care, but the extent of the problem remains largely unknown. The CareTrack Kids (CTK) research programme sought to address this evidence gap by developing a set of indicators to measure the quality of care for common paediatric conditions. In this study, we focus on one clinical area, 'preventive care' for pre-school aged children. Our objectives were two-fold: (i) develop and validate preventive care quality indicators and (ii) apply them in general medical practice to measure adherence., Methods: Clinical experts (n = 6) developed indicator questions (IQs) from clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations using a multi-stage modified Delphi process, which were pilot tested in general practice. The medical records of Australian children (n = 976) from general practices (n = 80) in Queensland, New South Wales and South Australia identified as having a consultation for one of 17 CTK conditions of interest were retrospectively reviewed by trained paediatric nurses. Statistical analyses were performed to estimate percentage compliance and its 95% confidence intervals., Results: IQs (n = 43) and eight care 'bundles' were developed and validated. Care was delivered in line with the IQs in 43.3% of eligible healthcare encounters (95% CI 30.5-56.7). The bundles of care with the highest compliance were 'immunisation' (80.1%, 95% CI 65.7-90.4), 'anthropometric measurements' (52.7%, 95% CI 35.6-69.4) and 'nutrition assessments' (38.5%, 95% CI 24.3-54.3), and lowest for 'visual assessment' (17.9%, 95% CI 8.2-31.9), 'musculoskeletal examinations' (24.4%, 95% CI 13.1-39.1) and 'cardiovascular examinations' (30.9%, 95% CI 12.3-55.5)., Conclusions: This study is the first known attempt to develop specific preventive care quality indicators and measure their delivery to Australian children in general practice. Our findings that preventive care is not reliably delivered to all Australian children and that there is substantial variation in adherence with the IQs provide a starting point for clinicians, researchers and policy makers when considering how the gap between recommended and actual care may be narrowed. The findings may also help inform the development of specific improvement interventions, incentives and national standards.

Background: Never events (NEs) are serious preventable patient safety incidents and are a component of formal quality and safety improvement (Q&SI) policies in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. A preliminary list of NEs for UK general practice has been developed, but the frequency of these events, or their acceptability to general practitioner (GPs) as a Q&SI approach, is currently unknown. The study aims to estimate (1) the frequency of 10 NEs occurring within GPs' own practices and (2) the extent to which the NE approach is perceived as acceptable for use., Methods: General practitioners were surveyed, and mixed-effects logistic regression models examined the relationship between GP opinions of NE, estimates of NE frequency, and the characteristics of the GPs and their practices., Results: Responses from 556 GPs in 412 practices were analyzed. Most participants (70%-88%, depending on the NE) agreed that the described incident should be designated as a NE. Three NEs were estimated to have occurred in less than 4% of practices in the last year; however, two NEs were estimated to have occurred in 45% to 61% of the practices. General practitioners reporting that a NE had occurred in their practice in the last year were significantly less likely to agree with the designation as a NE compared with GPs not reporting a NE (odds ratio, 0.42; 95% CI = 0.36-0.49)., Conclusions: The NE approach may have Q&SI potential for general practice, but further work to adapt the concept and content is required.

Objectives: Patient safety is a key concern of modern health systems, with numerous approaches to support safety. One, the trigger review method (TRM), is promoted nationally in Scotland as an approach to improve the safety of care in general medical practice. However, it remains unclear which factors are facilitating or hindering its implementation. The aim of this study was to identify the important factors that facilitate or hinder the implementation of the TRM in this setting., Design: Qualitative study employing semi-structured interviews. Data analysis was theoretically informed using normalisation process theory (NPT)., Setting: Scottish general practice., Participants: We conducted 28 semistructured interviews with general practitioners (n=12), practice nurses (n=11) and practice managers (n=5) in Scotland., Results: We identified four important factors that facilitated or hindered implementation: (1) the amount of time and allocated resources; (2) integration of the TRM into existing initiatives and frameworks facilitated implementation and justified participants' involvement; (3) the characteristics of the reviewers-implementation was facilitated by experienced, reflective clinicians with leadership roles in their teams; (4) the degree to which participants perceived the TRM as acceptable, feasible and useful., Conclusions: This study is the first known attempt to investigate how the TRM is implemented and perceived by general practice clinicians and staff. The four main factors that facilitated TRM implementation are comparable with the wider implementation science literature, suggesting that a small number of specific factors determine the success of most, if not all, complex healthcare interventions. These factors can be identified, described and understood through theoretical frameworks such as NPT and are amenable to intervention. Researchers and policymakers should proactively identify and address these factors., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To examine general practitioner (GP) understanding of the never event (NE) concept in general practice, and to identify potential enablers and barriers to implementation in UK general practice., Design: Qualitative study using focus groups. The data were analysed thematically and were informed by the normalisation process theory., Setting: General practice in Northwest England and Southwest Scotland., Participants: 25 GPs took part in five focus groups. 13 GPs were female and 12 male with an age range of 28-60., Results: The NE approach of avoiding serious preventable adverse outcomes from healthcare fitted with participants expectations of the delivery of care but the implementation of strategies to prevent the specific NE was considered complex and variable. The main themes identified participants' understandings and perceived limitations of the NE concept; the embedded layers of responsibility to implement NE within practices and the work required for implementation within general practices. Participants' accounts highlighted the differential nature of work in general practice and that the implementation of initiatives to address specific NE should be situated within a learning and systems approach to implementation. Some NEs were considered more relevant and amenable to simple solutions than others which could influence implementation., Conclusions: The NE concept was considered overall an important approach to help address key primary care patient safety issues. The utility of individual NEs may vary depending on the complexity of the initiatives that would be needed to manage related risks to as low as reasonably practicable., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: The aims of this study were twofold: (1) to design and validate a set of clinical indicators of appropriate care for tonsillitis and (2) to measure the level of tonsillitis care that is in line with guideline recommendations in a sample of Australian children., Study Design: A set of tonsillitis care indicators was developed from available national and international guidelines and validated in 4 stages. This research used the same design as the CareTrack Kids study, which was described in detail elsewhere., Setting: Samples of patient records from general practices, emergency departments, and hospital admissions were assessed., Subjects and Methods: Patient records of children aged 0 to 15 years were assessed for the presence of, and adherence to, the indicators for care delivered in 2012 and 2013., Results: Eleven indicators were developed. The records of 821 children (mean age, 5.0 years; SD, 4.0) with tonsillitis were screened. The reviewers conducted 2354 eligible indicator assessments across 1127 visits. Adherence to 6 indicators could be assessed and ranged from 14.3% to 73.2% (interquartile range 31.5% to 72.2%)., Conclusion: Our main findings are consistent with the international literature: the treatment of many children who present with confirmed or suspected tonsillitis is inconsistent with current guidelines. Future research should consider how the indicators could be applied in a structured and automated manner to increase the reliability and efficiency of record reviews and help raise clinicians' awareness of appropriate tonsillitis management.

Background: Exploring frontline staff perceptions of patient safety is important, because they largely determine how improvement interventions are understood and implemented. However, research evidence in this area is very limited. This study therefore: explores participants' understanding of patient safety as a concept; describes the factors thought to contribute to patient safety incidents (PSIs); and identifies existing improvement actions and potential opportunities for future interventions to help mitigate risks., Methods: A total of 34 semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 general practitioners, 12 practice nurses and 11 practice managers in the West of Scotland. The data were thematically analysed., Results: Patient safety was considered an important and integral part of routine practice. Participants perceived a proportion of PSIs as being inevitable and therefore not preventable. However, there was consensus that most factors contributing to PSIs are amenable to improvement efforts and acknolwedgement that the potential exists for further enhancements in care procedures and systems. Most were aware of, or already using, a wide range of safety improvement tools for this purpose. While the vast majority was able to identify specific, safety-critical areas requiring further action, this was counter-balanced by the reality that additional resources were a decisive requirment., Conclusion: The perceptions of participants in this study are comparable with the international patient safety literature: frontline staff and clinicians are aware of and potentially able to address a wide range of safety threats. However, they require additional resources and support to do so.

Objectives: To report the implementation of a trigger review method (TRM) in primary care, with a particular focus on its impact on patient safety-related findings., Design: Cross-sectional structured review of random samples (n=25) of electronic records of 'high-risk' patient groups conducted twice per year (each for a retrospective review period of 3 months)., Setting: 274 general practices in two regions of Scotland., Intervention: Contractual incentivisation of TRM implementation., Main Outcome Measures: Practice participation rate; characteristics of patient safety incidents (PSIs), for example, their prevalence, type, perceived severity and preventability; and actions or intended actions undertaken during and after trigger reviews., Results: 274 of 318 eligible practices (86.2%) returned 536 TRM Summary Reports, which outlined findings from reviews of 13 351 electronic patient records. 1887 (14.1%) PSIs were recorded, with a mean of 3.5 (536/1887) per Summary Report (SD±1.6). Of these, 830 (44.0%) were judged to have caused mild to moderate harm, with 262 (13.9%) cases resulting in more severe harm. A total of 852 PSIs (46.2%) were rated as preventable or potentially preventable. In 459 Summary Reports (85.6%), reviewers indicated implementing one or more improvement actions during the actual TRM process; and 2177 actions after completion of the TRM process (mean 4.1 (SD±3.3) actions per review)., Conclusions: The great majority of clinician reviewers 'successfully' applied the TRM, uncovering important but previously undetected PSIs, which prompted care teams to take action during and after the trigger reviews. The method and data generated have the potential to drive improvements in related care processes at the practice, regional and national health system level. TRM arguably increased 'ownership' of the safety challenge and clinician engagement in implementing their solutions to specific problems identified. Our results suggest that the TRM has potential as a feasible, pragmatic approach to improving primary care safety and quality., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

In the first series of related articles, we describe how assurance of patient safety in primary care was traditionally viewed by the medical profession hierarchy as being wholly dependent at the individual level upon a combination of education and training, knowledge, skill, experience and commitment to professional development. As well as summarising the evidence underpinning what we know about patient safety in primary care, we outline how contemporary thinking has evolved to recognise that the safety issue is complex, problematic and systemic, and that it is now beginning to attract the attention of national policymakers, educators and research funders in some countries. We also describe a range of recently developed educational safety concepts and methods that have been implemented as part of current national programme initiatives in the United Kingdom and internationally. Finally, we reflect on international progress on patient safety in primary care thus far; propose a future direction for related education, development and research; and briefly introduce the Human Factors based topics to be addressed in the forthcoming series of interrelated articles in this journal.

Although the digital revolution only started towards the end of the twentieth century, it has already dramatically shifted our world away from traditional industries and ushered in a new age of information. Virtually every aspect of our modern lives has either been transformed or challenged, including medical education. This article describes three of the important factors that are causing seismic changes in medical education in Scotland and abroad. The first is the new generation of 'digital natives' that are arriving in medical schools. In response, faculty members have had to become 'digital immigrants' and adapt their pedagogies. Second, the rise of social media has allowed the creation of virtual learning environments and communities that augment but also compete with traditional brick-and-mortar institutions. Finally, an ever-increasing range of e-learning resources promise freely accessible and up-to-date evidence, but their sheer volume and lack of standardisation will require careful curation., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Background: Patient safety research has focused largely on hospital settings despite the fact that in many countries, the majority of patient contacts are in primary care. The knowledge base about patient safety in primary care is developing but sparse and diagnostic error is a relatively understudied and an unmeasured area of patient safety. Diagnostic error rates vary according to how 'error' is defined but one suggested hallmark is clear evidence of 'missed opportunity' (MDOs) makes a correct or timely diagnosis to prevent them. While there is no agreed definition or method of measuring MDOs, retrospective manual chart or patient record reviews are a 'gold standard'. This study protocol aims to (1) determine the incidence of MDOs in English general practice, (2) identify the confounding and contributing factors that lead to MDOs and (3) determine the (potential) impact of the detected MDOs on patients., Methods/design: We plan to conduct a two-phase retrospective review of electronic health records in the Greater Manchester (GM) area of the UK. In the first phase, clinician reviewers will calibrate their performance in identifying and assessing MDOs against a gold standard 'primary reviewer' through the use of 'double' reviews of records. The findings will enable a preliminary estimate of the incidence of MDOs in general practice, which will be used to calculate the number of records to be reviewed in the second phase in order to estimate the true incidence of MDO in general practice. A sample of 15 general practices is required for phase 1 and up to 35 practices for phase 2. In each practice, the sample will consist of 100 patients aged ≥18 years on 1 April 2013 who have attended a face-to-face 'index consultation' between 1 April 2013 and 31 March 2015. The index consultation will be selected randomly from each unique patient record, occurring between 1 July 2013 and 30 June 2014., Discussion: There are no reliable estimates of safety problems related to diagnosis in English general practice. This study will lay the foundation for safety improvements in this area by providing a more reliable estimate of MDOs, their impact and their contributory factors.

Background: The use of checklists to minimise errors is well established in high reliability, safety-critical industries. In health care there is growing interest in checklists to standardise checking processes and ensure task completion, and so provide further systemic defences against error and patient harm. However, in UK general practice there is limited experience of safety checklist use., Aim: To identify workplace hazards that impact on safety, health and wellbeing, and performance, and codesign a standardised checklist process., Design and Setting: Application of mixed methods to identify system hazards in Scottish general practices and develop a safety checklist based on human factors design principles., Method: A multiprofessional 'expert' group (n = 7) and experienced front-line GPs, nurses, and practice managers (n = 18) identified system hazards and developed and validated a preliminary checklist using a combination of literature review, documentation review, consensus building workshops using a mini-Delphi process, and completion of content validity index exercise., Results: A prototype safety checklist was developed and validated consisting of six safety domains (for example, medicines management), 22 sub-categories (for example, emergency drug supplies) and 78 related items (for example, stock balancing, secure drug storage, and cold chain temperature recording)., Conclusion: Hazards in the general practice work system were prioritised that can potentially impact on the safety, health and wellbeing of patients, GP team members, and practice performance, and a necessary safety checklist prototype was designed. However, checklist efficacy in improving safety processes and outcomes is dependent on user commitment, and support from leaders and promotional champions. Although further usability development and testing is necessary, the concept should be of interest in the UK and internationally., (© British Journal of General Practice 2015.)

Objectives: (1) To ascertain from patients what really matters to them on a personal level of such high importance that it should 'always happen' when they interact with healthcare professionals and staff groups. (2) To critically review existing criteria for selecting 'always events' (AEs) and generate a candidate list of AE examples based on the patient feedback data., Design: Mixed methods study informed by participatory design principles., Subjects and Setting: Convenience samples of patients with a long-term clinical condition in Scottish general practices., Results: 195 patients from 13 general practices were interviewed (n=65) or completed questionnaires (n=130). 4 themes of high importance to patients were identified from which examples of potential 'AEs' (n=8) were generated: (1) emotional support, respect and kindness (eg, "I want all practice team members to show genuine concern for me at all times"); (2) clinical care management (eg, "I want the correct treatment for my problem"); (3) communication and information (eg, "I want the clinician who sees me to know my medical history") and (4) access to, and continuity of, healthcare (eg, "I want to arrange appointments around my family and work commitments"). Each 'AE' was linked to a system process or professional behaviour that could be measured to facilitate improvements in the quality of patient care., Conclusions: This study is the first known attempt to develop the AE concept as a person-centred approach to quality improvement in primary care. Practice managers were able to collect data from patients on what they 'always want' in terms of expectations related to care quality from which a list of AE examples was generated that could potentially be used as patient-driven quality improvement (QI) measures. There is strong implementation potential in the Scottish health service. However, further evaluation of the utility of the method is also necessary., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Rationale, Aims and Objectives: A positive and strong safety culture underpins effective learning from patient safety incidents in health care, including the community pharmacy (CP) setting. To build this culture, perceptions of safety climate must be measured with context-specific and reliable instruments. No pre-existing instruments were specifically designed or suitable for CP within Scotland. We therefore aimed to develop a psychometrically sound instrument to measure perceptions of safety climate within Scottish CPs., Methods: The first stage, development of a preliminary instrument, comprised three steps: (i) a literature review; (ii) focus group feedback; and (iii) content validation. The second stage, psychometric testing, consisted of three further steps: (iv) a pilot survey; (v) a survey of all CP staff within a single health board in NHS Scotland; and (vi) application of statistical methods, including principal components analysis and calculation of Cronbach's reliability coefficients, to derive the final instrument., Results: The preliminary questionnaire was developed through a process of literature review and feedback. This questionnaire was completed by staff in 50 CPs from the 131 (38%) sampled. 250 completed questionnaires were suitable for analysis. Psychometric evaluation resulted in a 30-item instrument with five positively correlated safety climate factors: leadership, teamwork, safety systems, communication and working conditions. Reliability coefficients were satisfactory for the safety climate factors (α > 0.7) and overall (α = 0.93)., Conclusions: The robust nature of the technical design and testing process has resulted in the development of an instrument with sufficient psychometric properties, which can be implemented in the community pharmacy setting in NHS Scotland., (© 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: The 'never event' concept has been implemented in many acute hospital settings to help prevent serious patient safety incidents. Benefits include increasing awareness of highly important patient safety risks among the healthcare workforce, promoting proactive implementation of preventive measures, and facilitating incident reporting., Aim: To develop a preliminary list of never events for general practice., Design and Setting: Application of a range of consensus-building methods in Scottish and UK general practices., Method: A total of 345 general practice team members suggested potential never events. Next, 'informed' staff (n =15) developed criteria for defining never events and applied the criteria to create a list of candidate never events. Finally, UK primary care patient safety 'experts' (n = 17) reviewed, refined, and validated a preliminary list via a modified Delphi group and by completing a content validity index exercise., Results: There were 721 written suggestions received as potential never events. Thematic categorisation reduced this to 38. Five criteria specific to general practice were developed and applied to produce 11 candidate never events. The expert group endorsed a preliminary list of 10 items with a content validity index (CVI) score of >80%., Conclusion: A preliminary list of never events was developed for general practice through practitioner experience and consensus-building methods. This is an important first step to determine the potential value of the never event concept in this setting. It is now intended to undertake further testing of this preliminary list to assess its acceptability, feasibility, and potential usefulness as a safety improvement intervention.

Background: The Trigger Review Method (TRM) is a structured approach to screening clinical records for undetected patient safety incidents (PSIs) and identifying learning and improvement opportunities. In Scotland, TRM participation can inform GP appraisal and has been included as a core component of the national primary care patient safety programme that was launched in March 2013. However, the clinical workforce needs up-skilled and the potential of TRM in GP training has yet to be tested. Current TRM training utilizes a workplace face-to-face session by a GP expert, which is not feasible. A less costly, more sustainable educational intervention is necessary to build capability at scale. We aimed to determine the feasibility and impact of TRM and a related training intervention in GP training., Methods: We recruited 25 west of Scotland GP trainees to attend a 2-hour TRM workshop. Trainees then applied TRM to 25 clinical records and returned findings within 4-weeks. A follow-up feedback workshop was held., Results: 21/25 trainees (84%) completed the task. 520 records yielded 80 undetected PSIs (15.4%). 36/80 were judged potentially preventable (45%) with 35/80 classified as causing moderate to severe harm (44%). Trainees described a range of potential learning and improvement plans. Training was positively received and appeared to be successful given these findings. TRM was valued as a safety improvement tool by most participants., Conclusion: This small study provides further evidence of TRM utility and how to teach it pragmatically. TRM is of potential value in GP patient safety curriculum delivery and preparing trainees for future safety improvement expectations.

Background: Current cigarette smoking is associated with reduced acute responses to corticosteroids and worse clinical outcomes in stable chronic asthma. The mechanism by which current smoking promotes this altered behavior is currently unclear. Whilst cytokines can induce corticosteroid insensitivity in-vitro, how current and former smoking affects airway cytokine concentrations and their responses to oral corticosteroids in stable chronic asthma is unclear., Objectives: To examine blood and sputum cytokine concentrations in never, ex and current smokers with asthma before and after oral corticosteroids., Methods: Exploratory study utilizing two weeks of oral dexamethasone (equivalent to 40 mg/day prednisolone) in 22 current, 21 never and 10 ex-smokers with asthma. Induced sputum supernatant and plasma was obtained before and after oral dexamethasone. 25 cytokines were measured by multiplex microbead system (Invitrogen, UK) on a Luminex platform., Results: Smokers with asthma had elevated sputum cytokine interleukin (IL) -6, -7, and -12 concentrations compared to never smokers with asthma. Few sputum cytokine concentrations changed in response to dexamethasone IL-17 and IFNα increased in smokers, CCL4 increased in never smokers and CCL5 and CXCL10 reduced in ex-smokers with asthma. Ex-smokers with asthma appeared to have evidence of an ongoing corticosteroid resistant elevation of cytokines despite smoking cessation. Several plasma cytokines were lower in smokers with asthma compared to never smokers with asthma., Conclusion: Cigarette smoking in asthma is associated with a corticosteroid insensitive increase in multiple airway cytokines. Distinct airway cytokine profiles are present in current smokers and never smokers with asthma and could provide an explanatory mechanism for the altered clinical behavior observed in smokers with asthma.

Background: Estimating harm rates for specific patient populations and detecting significant changes in them over time are essential if patient safety in general practice is to be improved. Clinical record review (CRR) is arguably the most suitable method for these purposes, but the optimal values and combinations of its parameters (such as numbers of records and practices) remain unknown. Our aims were to: 1. Determine and quantify CRR parameters; 2. Assess the precision and power of feasible CRR scenarios; and 3. Quantify the minimum requirements for adequate precision and acceptable power., Method: We explored precision and power of CRR scenarios using Monte Carlo simulation. A range of parameter values were combined in 864 different CRR scenarios, with 1000 random data sets generated for each, and harm rates were estimated and tested for change over time by fitting a generalised linear model with a Poisson response., Results: CRR scenarios with ≥ 100 detected harm incidents had harm rate estimates with acceptable precision. Harm reductions of 20% or ≥ 50% were detected with adequate power by those CRR scenarios with at least 100 and 500 harm incidents respectively. The number of detected harm incidents was dependent on the baseline harm rate multiplied by: the period of time reviewed in each record; number of records reviewed per practice; number of practices who reviewed records; and the number of times each record was reviewed., Conclusion: We developed a simple formula to calculate the minimum values of CRR parameters required to achieve adequate precision and acceptable power when monitoring harm rates. Our findings have practical implications for health care decision-makers, leaders and researchers aiming to measure and reduce harm at regional or national level.

Background: Root cause analysis (RCA) originated in the manufacturing engineering sector but has been adapted for routine use in healthcare to investigate patient safety incidents and facilitate organizational learning. Despite the limitations of the RCA evidence base, healthcare authorities and decision makers in NHS Scotland - similar to those internationally - have invested heavily in developing training programmes to build local capacity and capability, and this is a cornerstone of many organizational policies for investigating safety-critical issues. However, to our knowledge there has been no systematic attempt to follow-up and evaluate post-training experiences of RCA-trained staff in Scotland. Given the significant investment in people, time and funding we aimed to capture and learn from the reported experiences, benefits and attitudes of RCA-trained staff and the perceived impact on healthcare systems and safety., Methods: We adapted a questionnaire used in a published Australian research study to undertake a cross sectional online survey of health care professionals (e.g. nursing & midwifery, medical doctors and pharmacists) formally trained in RCA by a single territorial health board region in NHS Scotland., Results: A total of 228/469 of invited staff completed the survey (48%). A majority of respondents had yet to participate in a post-training RCA investigation (n=127, 55.7%). Of RCA-experience staff, 71 had assumed a lead investigator role (70.3%) on one or more occasions. A clear majority indicated that their improvement recommendations were generally or partly implemented (82%). The top three barriers to RCA success were cited as: lack of time (54.6%), unwilling colleagues (34%) and inter-professional differences (31%). Differences in agreement levels between RCA-experienced and inexperienced respondents were noted on whether a follow-up session would be beneficial after conducting RCA (65.3% v 39.4%) and if peer feedback on RCA reports would be of educational value (83.2% v 37.0%). Comparisons with the previous research highlighted significant differences such as less reported difficulties within RCA teams (P<0.001) and a greater proportion of respondents taking on RCA leadership roles in this study (P<0.001)., Conclusion: This study adds to our knowledge and understanding of the need to improve the effectiveness of RCA training and frontline practices in healthcare settings. The overall evidence points to a potential organisational learning need to provide RCA-trained staff with continuous development opportunities and performance feedback. Healthcare authorities may wish to look more critically at whom they train in RCA, and how this is delivered and supported educationally to maximize cost-benefits, organizational learning and safer patient care.

Background: A significant minority of patients do not receive all the evidence-based care recommended for their conditions. Health care quality may be improved by reducing this observed variation. Composite measures offer a different patient-centred perspective on quality and are utilized in acute hospitals via the 'care bundle' concept as indicators of the reliability of specific (evidence-based) care delivery tasks and improved outcomes. A care bundle consists of a number of time-specific interventions that should be delivered to every patient every time. We aimed to apply the care bundle concept to selected QOF data to measure the quality of evidence-based care provision., Methods: Care bundles and components were selected from QOF indicators according to defined criteria. Five clinical conditions were suitable for care bundles: Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease (CHD), Stroke & Transient Ischaemic Attack (TIA), Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and Diabetes Mellitus (DM). Each bundle has 3-8 components. A retrospective audit was undertaken in a convenience sample of nine general medical practices in the West of Scotland. Collected data included delivery (or not) of individual bundle components to all patients included on specific disease registers. Practice level and overall compliance with bundles and components were calculated in SPSS and expressed as a percentage., Results: Nine practices (64.3%) with a combined patient population of 56,948 were able to provide data in the format requested. Overall compliance with developed QOF-based care bundles (composite measures) was as follows: CHD 64.0%, range 35.0-71.9%; Stroke/TIA 74.1%, range 51.6-82.8%; CKD 69.0%, range 64.0-81.4%; and COPD 82.0%, range 47.9-95.8%; and DM 58.4%, range 50.3-65.2%., Conclusions: In this small study compliance with individual QOF-based care bundle components was high, but overall ('all or nothing') compliance was substantially lower. Care bundles may provide a more informed measure of care quality than existing methods. However, the acceptability, feasibility and potential impact on clinical outcomes are unknown.

Background: Computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is increasingly being used as first investigation for suspected pulmonary embolism (PE). The investigation has high predictive value, but is resource and time intensive and exposes patients to considerable radiation. Our aim was to assess the potential value of a negative d-dimer assay to exclude pulmonary emboli and reduce the number of performed CTPAs., Methods: All CTPAs performed in a Scottish secondary care hospital for a fourteen month period were retrospectively reviewed. Collected data included the presence or absence of PE, d-dimer results and patient demographics. PE positive CTPAs were reviewed by a specialist panel., Results: Pulmonary embolisms were reported for 66/405 (16.3%) CTPAs and d-dimer tests were performed for 216 (53%). 186/216 (86%) patients had a positive and 30 (14%) a negative d-dimer result. The panel agreed 5/66 (7.6%) false positive examinations. The d-dimer assay's negative predictive value was 93.3% (95% CI = 76.5%-98.8%) based on the original number of positive CTPAs and 100% (95% CI = 85.9%-100%) based on expert review. Significant non-PE intrapulmonary pathology was reported for 312/405 (77.0) CTPAs, including 13 new diagnoses of carcinoma., Conclusions: We found that a low d-dimer score excluded all pulmonary embolisms, after a further specialist panel review identified initial false positive reports. However, current evidence-based guidelines still recommend that clinicians combine a d-dimer result with a validated clinical risk score when selecting suitable patients for CTPA. This may result in better use of limited resources, prevent patients being exposed to unnecessary irradiation and prevent potential complications as a result of iodinated contrast.

Rationale, Aims and Objectives: Building a strong and positive safety culture in health care teams and organizations is essential for patient safety. Measuring individual perceptions of safety climate is an integral part of this process. Evidence of the successful application and potential usefulness of this approach is increasingly available for secondary care settings but little is known about the safety climate in UK primary care. We therefore aimed to measure perceptions of safety climate in primary care. Further aims were to determine whether perceptions varied significantly between practice teams and according to specific participant and practice characteristics., Method: We undertook a cross-sectional, anonymous postal questionnaire survey of randomly selected west of Scotland primary care teams. Safety climate mean scores with standard deviations were calculated for respondents, practice teams and the region., Results: A total of 563 (84%) team members from 49 practices (24.5%) returned questionnaires. The overall safety climate mean score was 5.48 (0.78). Significant differences in safety climate perceptions were found at the practice team level (P < 0.001) and for specific characteristics: respondents' years of experience, whether they were community or practice based, their professional roles and practices' training status. Practice managers and general practitioners perceived the safety climate more positive than other respondents (P < 0.001)., Conclusion: This was the first known attempt to measure perceptions of safety climate in UK primary care with a validated instrument specifically developed for that purpose. Reported perceptions of the prevailing safety climate were generally positive. This may reflect ongoing efforts to build a strong safety culture in primary care or alternatively point to an overestimation of the effectiveness of local safety systems. The significant variation in perception between certain staff groups has potential safety implications and may have to be aligned for a positive and strong safety culture to be built. While safety climate measurement has various benefits at the individual, practice team and regional level, further research of its association with specific safety outcomes is required., (© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Background: Many patients unnecessarily receive proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) drugs long term with significant financial and safety implications. Educating, empowering and supporting patients to self-manage their symptoms can lead to significant and sustained reductions in PPI prescribing. We aimed to implement a programme to reduce inappropriate PPI prescribing., Method: Eligible patients in one general medical practice in rural Scotland were invited for participation between November 2008 and February 2010. Patients attended special nurse advisor clinics, completed dyspepsia questionnaires, received information, formulated self-management plans and were offered flexible support., Results: Of the study population, 437/2883 (15%) were prescribed PPIs. Of these, 166 (38%) were judged eligible for participation. After 12 months, 138/157 (83%) had reduced or stopped their PPIs, while 19/157 (11%) had reverted. The estimated annual net saving in the prescribing budget was ?3180.67. Self-reported understanding of symptom self-management increased from 6/20 (30%) to 18/20 (90%) patients after participation in the programme., Conclusion: A patient-centred programme delivered by a specialist nurse significantly reduced PPI prescribing with financial and potential therapeutic benefits. The vast majority of eligible patients were able to 'step down and off' or 'step off' PPI use after 12 months without any complications or deteriorating symptom control. Further research with larger cohorts of practices and patients is needed to develop a feasible, acceptable and effective programme if similar benefits are to be achieved for primary care in general.

Introduction: Significant event analysis (SEA) is now well established in UK primary care. Previously, considerable variation has been reported in the knowledge, skills and attitudes of general practitioners undertaking SEA. Little is known about the wider team's understanding, participation or perceptions. We therefore aimed to determine the awareness, degree of analysis and perceived risk of recurrence of a recent significant event, types of discussion forums, staff groups' participation and perceived barriers. Comparisons were made with a 2003 survey and significant changes described., Method: A postal questionnaire survey was undertaken of a random selection of general practice team members in National Health Service Greater Glasgow in 2008/9., Results: In total, 375/711 respondents (53%) from 111 practices participated. The vast majority was aware of a recent significant event, 29% reported not implementing a change and 23% perceived the risk of recurrence as moderate to high. Administrative and community-based staff were infrequently involved in meetings. Dedicated significant event meetings remain uncommon (P = 0.06). Perceptions improved since 2003, but lack of time remained a concern., Discussion: This survey was the first known attempt to include all members of the primary care team while studying SEA. Awareness and analysis levels were high, but only lead to sustainable improvement of care quality and clinical safety if teams implement change. Greater use should be made of dedicated SEA meetings and participation of all staff groups increased to gain full benefits. Lack of time can be managed pragmatically by prioritizing events based on their perceived severity, potential for change and potential team involvement., (© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Background: Making healthcare safer is an international priority. Patient safety modules are now taught in medical schools, and methods to assess related student knowledge and attitudes have been developed. However, little is known about the attitudes and knowledge which foundation doctors are developing to patient safety and incident reporting in the healthcare workplace, since a specific assessment tool appears to be lacking., Aims: To develop, content validate and pilot test an online questionnaire survey to elicit foundation doctors' knowledge and experience of patient safety and incident reporting, and assess related attitudes and behaviours., Methods: Questionnaire content validity was facilitated through: a steering group; literature review; feedback from foundation year doctors and consultant staff; a modified Delphi group; and completion of a content validity index by experts. In 2010 a cross-sectional online survey of 110 foundation year 1 and 2 doctors was then undertaken in three Scottish NHS board areas, utilising the developed 25 item questionnaire., Results: The questionnaire was validated, and piloted among 69 foundation year doctors who responded to the questionnaire. The pilot has provided valuable insights into trainee attitudes and experience. For example, 32 (48%) believed that most safety incidents were due to things that they could not do anything about; and 31 (43%) admitted to being involved in medication errors which were not formally reported., Conclusions: The pilot study was successful in taking the first steps to developing a validated survey questionnaire for a key staff group, foundation year doctors, in a priority area. However, the findings raise concerns about trainee experience of and attitudes to reporting, and the frequency with which incidents go unreported.

Ecthyma contagiosum (orf) is caused by a parapox virus, which results in ulcerative stomatitis of mainly sheep and goats. The disease may be transmitted to humans through direct contact. Complications are rare in healthy individuals, who rarely report the disease. Two married, recreational sheep farmers, were bitten on their index fingers by an affected lamb. While the husband made an uneventful recovery after oral flucloxacillin, his wife was admitted to hospital with necrosis of her finger, cellulitis and lymphangitis requiring intravenous clindamycin. She subsequently developed a generalized maculo-papular rash, which was initially thought to be an adverse drug reaction, but, on hindsight, may have been erythema multiforme associated with orf. Orf is a common zoonosis, rarely reported in general practice. The disease is usually self-limiting and resolves in 6-8 weeks, but complications may occur. The diagnosis should be considered in at-risk occupational and religious groups.

Minimising the risk of preventable harm to patients is a National Health Service (NHS) priority in the UK. In the past decade, a patient safety agenda has been established in many secondary care, but is only now migrating to primary care. Information about the epidemiology of error, contributory factors and the scale of preventable harm is limited in comparison to what is known in acute hospitals. We describe how to apply a recently developed trigger tool - a rapid audit method of screening electronic patient records to detect patient harm - as a feasible part of routine primary care practice. We promote the idea that the trigger tool approach will enable care teams and clinicians to refocus their learning and improvement efforts on one of the most serious issues facing the NHS or any modern healthcare system - how to minimise the risks of unintended but avoidable harm to patients.