Search

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract 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 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.

Abstract 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.

Abstract 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.

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 AHistory; 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 AHistory (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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]