Search

Objective: Assess perceived barriers to speaking up and to provide recommendations for reducing barriers to reporting adverse events and near misses., Design, Setting, Participants, Intervention: A six-item survey was administered to critical care providers in 19 Intensive Care Units in Abu Dhabi as part of an organizational safety and quality improvement effort., Main Outcome Measures: Questions elicited perspectives about influences on reporting, perceived barriers and recommendations for conveying patient safety as an organizational priority. Qualitative thematic analyses were conducted for open-ended questions., Results: A total of 1171 participants were invited to complete the survey and 639 responded (response rate = 54.6%). Compared to other stakeholders (e.g. the media, public), a larger proportion of respondents 'agreed/strongly agreed' that corporate health system leadership and the health regulatory authority encouraged and supported error reporting (83%; 75%), and had the most influence on their decisions to report (81%; 74%). 29.5% of respondents cited fear of repercussion as a barrier, and 21.3% of respondents indicated no barriers to reporting. Barriers included perceptions of a culture of blame and issues with reporting procedures. Recommendations to establish patient safety as an organizational priority included creating supportive environments to discuss errors, hiring staff to advocate for patient safety, and implementing policies to standardize clinical practices and streamline reporting procedures., Conclusions: Influences on reporting perceived by providers in the UAE were similar to those in the US and other countries. These findings highlight the roles of corporate leadership and regulators in developing non-punitive environments where reporting is a valuable and safe activity., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Despite decades of investment in patient safety, unintentional patient harm remains a major challenge in the health care industry. Peer-to-peer assessment in the nuclear industry has been shown to reduce harm. The study team's goal was to pilot and assess the feasibility of this approach in health care. The team developed tools and piloted a peer-to-peer assessment at 2 academic hospitals: Massachusetts General Hospital and Johns Hopkins Hospital. The assessment evaluated both the institutions' organizational approach to quality and safety as well as their approach to reducing 2 specific areas of patient harm. Site visits were completed and consisted of semistructured interviews with institutional leaders and clinical staff as well as direct patient observations using audit tools. Reports with recommendations were well received and each institution has developed improvement plans. The study team believes that peer-to-peer assessment in health care has promise and warrants consideration for wider adoption.

Purpose: To increase the proportion of adolescents with Medicaid who receive preventive care services in an urban pediatric clinic., Methods: A quality improvement intervention was implemented at an urban pediatric primary care clinic between November 2013 and October 2014. The intervention systematically "flipped" acute visits into well-care visits for patients ages 12-21 years, when overdue. The primary process measure was the percentage of acute visits expanded to include well-care components out of total eligible opportunities. The primary outcome measure was adolescent well-care (AWC) completion in 2014 versus 2013 and 2012., Results: Among 857 adolescents with Medicaid, 124 additional AWC visits were completed by October 2014 compared to 2013 and 71 additional visits compared to 2012. The gap to achieving Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set neutral zone targets for AWC was reduced by 59% compared to 2013 and by 54% compared to 2012. The mean proportion of eligible acute opportunities "flipped" monthly increased from 17% (range: 10%-21%) during the initial 3 months of implementation to 30% (range: 5%-50%) in the last 3 months., Conclusions: Systematically flipping acute visits into well visits resulted in reaching Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set quality targets for AWC, which had not previously been accomplished by this clinic. Incorporating staff and provider feedback strengthened intervention fidelity and buy-in despite time constraints in a busy, urban setting., (Copyright © 2017 Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Simulation is a powerful learning tool for building individual and team competencies of frontline health care providers with demonstrable impact on performance. This article examines the impact of simulation in building strategic leadership competencies for patient safety and quality among executive leaders in health care organizations., Methods: We designed, implemented, and evaluated a simulation as part of a larger safety leadership network meeting for executive leaders. This simulation targeted knowledge competencies of governance priority, culture of continuous improvement, and internal transparency and feedback. Eight teams of leaders in health care organizations-a total of 55 participants-participated in a 4-hour session. Each team performed collectively as a new chief executive officer (CEO) tasked with a goal of rescuing a hospital with a failing safety record. Teams worked on a modifiable simulation board reflecting the current dysfunctional organizational structure of the simulated hospital. They assessed and redesigned accountability structures based on information acquired in encounter sessions with confederates playing the role of internal staff and external consultants., Results: Data were analyzed, and results are presented as qualitative themes arising from the simulation exercise, participant reaction data, and performance during the simulation. Key findings include high degrees of variability in solutions developed for the dysfunctional hospital system and generally positive learner reactions to the simulation experience., Conclusions: This study illustrates the potential value of simulation as a mechanism for learning and strategy development for executive leaders grappling with patient safety issues. Future research should explore the cognitive or functional fidelity of organizational simulations and the use of custom scenarios for strategic planning.

Background: Collaborative improvement networks draw on the science of collaborative organizational learning and communities of practice to facilitate peer-to-peer learning, coaching, and local adaption. Although significant improvements in patient safety and quality have been achieved through collaborative methods, insight regarding how collaborative networks are used by members is needed. Improvement Strategy: The Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program (CUSP) Learning Network is a multi-institutional collaborative network that is designed to facilitate peer-to-peer learning and coaching specifically related to CUSP. Member organizations implement all or part of the CUSP methodology to improve organizational safety culture, patient safety, and care quality. Qualitative case studies developed by participating members examine the impact of network participation across three levels of analysis (unit, hospital, health system). In addition, results of a satisfaction survey designed to evaluate member experiences were collected to inform network development., Results: Common themes across case studies suggest that members found value in collaborative learning and sharing strategies across organizational boundaries related to a specific improvement strategy., Conclusion: The CUSP Learning Network is an example of network-based collaborative learning in action. Although this learning network focuses on a particular improvement methodology-CUSP-there is clear potential for member-driven learning networks to grow around other methods or topic areas. Such collaborative learning networks may offer a way to develop an infrastructure for longer-term support of improvement efforts and to more quickly diffuse creative sustainment strategies.

Background: Central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) remains one of the most common and deadly hospital acquired infections in the United States. Creating a culture of safety is an important part of healthcare-associated infection improvement efforts; however, few studies have robustly examined the role of safety climate in patient safety outcomes. We applied a pattern-based approach to measuring safety climate to investigate the relationship between intensive care unit (ICU) patient safety climate profiles and CLABSI rates., Methods: Secondary analyses of data collected from 237 adult ICUs participating in the On the CUSP: Stop BSI project. Unit-level baseline scores on the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety, a survey designed to assess patient safety climate, and CLABSI rates, were investigated. Three climate profile characteristics were examined: profile elevation, variability, and shape., Results: Zero-inflated Poisson analyses suggested an association between the relative incidence of CLABSI and safety climate profile shape. K-means cluster analysis revealed 5 climate profile shapes. ICUs with conflicting climates and nonpunitive climates had a significantly higher CLABSI risk compared with ICUs with generative leadership climates., Conclusions: Relative CLABSI risk was related to safety climate profile shape. None of the climate profile shapes was related to the odds of reporting zero CLABSI. Our findings support using pattern-based methods for examining safety climate rather than examining the relationships between each narrow dimension of safety climate and broader safety outcomes like CLABSI., (Copyright © 2014 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The issues of medical errors and medical malpractice have stimulated significant interest in establishing transparency in health care, in other words, ensuring that medical professionals formally report medical errors and disclose related outcomes to patients and families. However, research has amply shown that transparency is not a universal practice among physicians., Methods: A review of the literature was carried out using the search terms "transparency," "patient safety," "disclosure," "medical error," "error reporting," "medical malpractice," "doctor-patient relationship," and "physician" to find articles describing physician barriers to transparency., Results: The current literature underscores that a complex Web of factors influence physician reluctance to engage in transparency. Specifically, 4 domains of barriers emerged from this analysis: intrapersonal, interpersonal, institutional, and societal., Conclusion: Transparency initiatives will require vigorous, interdisciplinary efforts to address the systemic and pervasive nature of the problem. Several ethical and social-psychological barriers suggest that medical schools and hospitals should collaborate to establish continuity in education and ensure that knowledge acquired in early education is transferred into long-term learning. At the institutional level, practical and cultural barriers suggest the creation of supportive learning environments and private discussion forums where physicians can seek moral support in the aftermath of an error. To overcome resistance to culture transformation, incremental change should be considered, for example, replacing arcane transparency policies and complex reporting mechanisms with clear, user-friendly guidelines.

Objective: In this article, we describe some of the cognitive and system-based sources of detection and interpretation errors in diagnostic radiology and discuss potential approaches to help reduce misdiagnoses., Conclusion: Every radiologist worries about missing a diagnosis or giving a false-positive reading. The retrospective error rate among radiologic examinations is approximately 30%, with real-time errors in daily radiology practice averaging 3-5%. Nearly 75% of all medical malpractice claims against radiologists are related to diagnostic errors. As medical reimbursement trends downward, radiologists attempt to compensate by undertaking additional responsibilities to increase productivity. The increased workload, rising quality expectations, cognitive biases, and poor system factors all contribute to diagnostic errors in radiology. Diagnostic errors are underrecognized and underappreciated in radiology practice. This is due to the inability to obtain reliable national estimates of the impact, the difficulty in evaluating effectiveness of potential interventions, and the poor response to systemwide solutions. Most of our clinical work is executed through type 1 processes to minimize cost, anxiety, and delay; however, type 1 processes are also vulnerable to errors. Instead of trying to completely eliminate cognitive shortcuts that serve us well most of the time, becoming aware of common biases and using metacognitive strategies to mitigate the effects have the potential to create sustainable improvement in diagnostic errors.

Missed, delayed, or wrong diagnoses can have a severe impact on patients, providers, and the entire health care system. One mechanism implicated in such diagnostic errors is the deterioration of cognitive diagnostic skills that are used rarely or not at all over a prolonged period of time. Existing evidence regarding maintenance of effective cognitive reasoning skills in the clinical education, organizational training, and human factors literatures suggest that continuing education plays a critical role in mitigating and managing diagnostic skill decay. Recent models also underscore the role of system level factors (eg, cognitive decision support tools, just-in-time training opportunities) in supporting clinical reasoning process. The purpose of this manuscript is to offer a multidisciplinary review of cognitive models of clinical decision making skills in order to provide a list of best practices for supporting continuous improvement and maintenance of cognitive diagnostic processes through continuing education., (Copyright © 2012 The Alliance for Continuing Education in the Health Professions, the Society for Academic Continuing Medical Education, and the Council on CME, Association for Hospital Medical Education.)

Background: Evaluation and measurement are the building blocks of effective skill development, transfer of training, maintenance and sustainment of effective team performance, and continuous improvement. Evaluation efforts have varied in their methods, time frame, measures, and design. On the basis of the existing body of work, 12 best practice principles were extrapolated from the science of evaluation and measurement into the practice of team training evaluation. Team training evaluation refers to efforts dedicated to enumerating the impact of training (1) across multiple dimensions, (2) across multiple settings, and (3) over time. Evaluations of efforts to optimize teamwork are often afterthoughts in an industry that is grounded in evidence-based practice. The best practices regarding team training evaluation are provided as practical reminders and guidance for continuing to build a balanced and robust body of evidence regarding the impact of team training in health care. THE 12 BEST PRACTICES: The best practices are organized around three phases of training: planning, implementation, and follow-up. Rooted in the science of team training evaluation and performance measurement, they range from Best Practice 1: Before designing training, start backwards: think about traditional frameworks for evaluation in reverse to Best Practice 7: Consider organizational, team, or other factors that may help (or hinder) the effects of training and then to Best Practice 12: Report evaluation results in a meaningful way, both internally and externally., Conclusions: Although the 12 best practices may be perceived as intuitive, they are intended to serve as reminders that the notion of evidence-based practice applies to quality improvement initiatives such as team training and team development as equally as it does to clinical intervention and improvement efforts.

Teamwork training constitutes one of the core approaches for moving healthcare systems toward increased levels of quality and safety, and simulation provides a powerful method of delivering this training, especially for face-paced and dynamic specialty areas such as Emergency Medicine. Team performance measurement and evaluation plays an integral role in ensuring that simulation-based training for teams (SBTT) is systematic and effective. However, this component of SBTT systems is overlooked frequently. This article addresses this gap by providing a review and practical introduction to the process of developing and implementing evaluation systems in SBTT. First, an overview of team performance evaluation is provided. Second, best practices for measuring team performance in simulation are reviewed. Third, some of the prominent measurement tools in the literature are summarized and discussed relative to the best practices. Subsequently, implications of the review are discussed for the practice of training teamwork in Emergency Medicine.

This article provides a qualitative review of the published literature dealing with the design, implementation, and evaluation of simulation-based team training (SBTT) in healthcare with the purpose of providing synthesis of the present state of the science to guide practice and future research. A systematic literature review was conducted and produced 27 articles meeting the inclusion criteria. These articles were coded using a low-inference content analysis coding scheme designed to extract important information about the training program. Results are summarized in 10 themes describing important considerations for what occurs before, during, and after a training event. Both across disciplines and within Emergency Medicine (EM), SBTT has been shown to be an effective method for increasing teamwork skills. However, the literature to date has underspecified some of the fundamental features of the training programs, impeding the dissemination of lessons learned. Implications of this study are discussed for team training in EM.

The provision of high-quality, efficient care results from the coordinated, cooperative efforts of multiple technically competent health care providers working in concert over time, spanning disciplinary and professional boundaries. Accordingly, the role of medical education must include the development of providers who are both expert clinicians and expert team members. However, the competencies underlying effective teamwork are only just beginning to be integrated into medical school curricula and residency programs. Therefore, continuing education (CE) is a vital mechanism for practitioners already in the field to develop the attitudes, behaviors (skills), and cognitive knowledge necessary for highly reliable and effective team performance.The present article provides an overview of more than 30 years of evidence regarding team performance and team training in order to guide, shape, and build CE activities that focus on developing team competencies. Recognizing that even the most comprehensive and well-designed team-oriented CE programs will fail unless they are supported by an organizational and professional culture that values collaborative behavior, ten evidence-based lessons for practice are offered in order to facilitate the use of the science of team-training in efforts to foster continuous quality improvement and enhance patient safety.

Background: Medical care is a team effort, especially as patient cases are more complex. Communication, cooperation, and coordination are vital to effective care, especially in complex service lines such as the operating room (OR). Team training, specifically the TeamSTEPPS training program, has been touted as one methodology for optimizing teamwork among providers and increasing patient safety. Although such team-training programs have transformed the culture and outcomes of other dynamic, high-risk industries such as aviation and nuclear power, evidence of team training effectiveness in health care is still evolving. Although providers tend to react positively to many training programs, evidence that training contributes to important behavioral and patient safety outcomes is lacking., Method: A multilevel evaluation of the TeamSTEPPS training program was conducted within the OR service line with a control location. The evaluation was a mixed-model design with one between-groups factor (TeamSTEPPS training versus no training) and two within-groups factors (time period, team). The groups were located at separate campuses to minimize treatment diffusion. Trainee reactions, learning, behaviors in the OR, and proxy outcome measures such as the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS) and Operating Room Management Attitudes Questionnaire (ORMAQ) were collected., Results: All levels of evaluation demonstrated positive results. The trained group demonstrated significant increases in the quantity and quality of presurgical procedure briefings and the use of quality teamwork behaviors during cases. Increases were also found in perceptions of patient safety culture and teamwork attitudes., Discussion: The hospital system has integrated elements of TeamSTEPPS into orientation training provided to all incoming hospital employees, including nonclinical staff.