Trends in Pediatric Head and Facial Trauma During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The effect of physical-distancing policies and school closures on pediatric health has been a topic of major concern in the United States during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The objective of this study was to assess the immediate impact of these public policies on patterns of head and facial trauma in the pediatric population. MATERIALS AND METHOD: The Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS) was queried to identify patient encounters at 46 children's hospitals across the United States in 2016-2020. Encounters were included if resultant in ICD-10 diagnosis for head or facial trauma in a child under 18 between April 1 and June 30 in 2020 (first COVID-19 school closures) and during the same period in the previous 4 years (for comparison). RESULTS: A total of 170,832 patient encounters for pediatric head and facial trauma were recorded during the study period, including 28,030 (16.4%) in 2020 and 142,802 (83.6%) in 2016-2019. Patient encounters declined significantly in 2020 among children of all age groups relative to previous years. Relative reductions were greatest in children aged 11 to 17 (middle/high school) and 6 to 10 (elementary school), at -34.6% (95% confidence interval: -23.6%, -44%; P <0.001) and -27.7% (95% confidence interval: -18.4%, -36%; P <0.001). Variation in relative reductions by race/ethnicity, sex, and rural/urban status were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Physical-distancing policies and school closures at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic correlated with significant reductions in pediatric head and facial trauma patient encounters. As in-person activities resume, reductions in head and facial trauma during the pandemic may indicate a range of possible preventable injuries in the future.

Classification of patient-safety incidents in primary care.

Primary care lags behind secondary care in the reporting of, and learning from, incidents that put patient safety at risk. In primary care, there is no universally agreed approach to classifying the severity of harm arising from such patient-safety incidents. This lack of an agreed approach limits learning that could lead to the prevention of injury to patients. In a review of research on patient safety in primary care, we identified 21 existing approaches to the classification of harm severity. Using the World Health Organization's (WHO's) International Classification for Patient Safety as a reference, we undertook a framework analysis of these approaches. We then developed a new system for the classification of harm severity. To assess and classify harm, most existing approaches use measures of symptom duration (11/21), symptom severity (11/21) and/or the level of intervention required to manage the harm (14/21). However, few of these approaches account for the deleterious effects of hospitalization or the psychological stress that may be experienced by patients and/or their relatives. The new classification system we developed builds on WHO's International Classification for Patient Safety and takes account not only of hospitalization and psychological stress but also of so-called near misses and uncertain outcomes. The constructs we have outlined have the potential to be applied internationally, across primary-care settings, to improve both the detection and prevention of incidents that cause the most severe harm to patients.

Les soins primaires ont du retard sur les soins secondaires en ce qui concerne l'établissement de rapports sur les incidents qui menacent la sécurité des patients et les enseignements qui en découlent. Dans le cas des soins primaires, il n'existe pas de méthode universellement acceptée pour classifier la gravité des dommages résultant d'incidents liés à la sécurité des patients. L'absence d'une telle méthode limite les enseignements qui pourraient favoriser la prévention des traumatismes chez les patients. Dans le cadre d'une analyse documentaire sur la sécurité des patients en matière de soins primaires, nous avons repéré l'existence de 21 méthodes de classification de la gravité des dommages. En prenant comme référence la Classification internationale pour la sécurité des patients de l'Organisation mondiale de la Santé (OMS), nous avons entrepris une analyse du cadre de ces méthodes. Nous avons ensuite conçu un nouveau système de classification de la gravité des dommages. Pour évaluer et classifier les dommages, la plupart des méthodes existantes utilisent des mesures portant sur la durée des symptômes (11/21), la gravité des symptômes (11/21) et/ou le niveau d'intervention requis pour prendre en charge les dommages (14/21). Néanmoins, rares sont celles qui tiennent compte des effets délétères de l'hospitalisation ou du stress psychologique que peuvent ressentir les patients et/ou leurs proches. Le nouveau système de classification que nous avons élaboré repose sur la Classification internationale pour la sécurité des patients de l'OMS et tient compte non seulement de l'hospitalisation et du stress psychologique, mais aussi de ce qu'il est convenu d'appeler les accidents évités de justesse et des résultats incertains. Les concepts que nous avons définis peuvent être appliqués dans les établissements de soins primaires du monde entier pour améliorer la détection et la prévention des incidents qui provoquent les plus graves dommages pour les patients.

La atención primaria queda por debajo de la atención secundaria en la notificación y el aprendizaje de incidentes que ponen en riesgo la seguridad del paciente. En la atención primaria, no existe un enfoque universalmente aceptado para clasificar la gravedad del daño que surge de tales incidentes que afectan a la seguridad del paciente. Esta falta de un enfoque consensuado limita el aprendizaje que podría conducir a la prevención de lesiones a los pacientes. En una revisión de la investigación sobre la seguridad del paciente en la atención primaria, se identificaron 21 enfoques existentes para la clasificación de la gravedad del daño. Con la Clasificación Internacional para la Seguridad del Paciente de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) como referencia, se llevó a cabo un análisis del marco de estos enfoques. A continuación, se desarrolló un nuevo sistema para la clasificación de la gravedad del daño. Para evaluar y clasificar el daño, la mayoría de los enfoques existentes usan medidas de la duración de los síntomas (11/21), la gravedad de los síntomas (11/21) y/o el nivel de intervención necesario para gestionar el daño (14/21). Sin embargo, pocos de estos enfoques explican los efectos nocivos de la hospitalización o el estrés psicológico que pueden experimentar los pacientes y/o sus familiares. El nuevo sistema de clasificación desarrollado se basa en la Clasificación Internacional para la Seguridad del Paciente de la OMS y tiene en cuenta no solo la hospitalización y el estrés psicológico, sino también los denominados casi accidentes y los resultados inciertos. Los constructos descritos tienen el potencial de aplicarse internacionalmente, en entornos de atención primaria, para mejorar tanto la detección como la prevención de incidentes que causan los daños más graves a los pacientes.

Patient Safety Incidents Involving Sick Children in Primary Care in England and Wales: A Mixed Methods Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The UK performs poorly relative to other economically developed countries on numerous indicators of care quality for children. The contribution of iatrogenic harm to these outcomes is unclear. As primary care is the first point of healthcare contact for most children, we sought to investigate the safety of care provided to children in this setting. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We undertook a mixed methods investigation of reports of primary care patient safety incidents involving sick children from England and Wales' National Reporting and Learning System between 1 January 2005 and 1 December 2013. Two reviewers independently selected relevant incident reports meeting prespecified criteria, and then descriptively analyzed these reports to identify the most frequent and harmful incident types. This was followed by an in-depth thematic analysis of a purposive sample of reports to understand the reasons underpinning incidents. Key candidate areas for strengthening primary care provision and reducing the risks of systems failures were then identified through multidisciplinary discussions. Of 2,191 safety incidents identified from 2,178 reports, 30% (n = 658) were harmful, including 12 deaths and 41 cases of severe harm. The children involved in these incidents had respiratory conditions (n = 387; 18%), injuries (n = 289; 13%), nonspecific signs and symptoms, e.g., fever (n = 281; 13%), and gastrointestinal or genitourinary conditions (n = 268; 12%), among others. Priority areas for improvement included safer systems for medication provision in community pharmacies; triage processes to enable effective and timely assessment, diagnosis, and referral of acutely sick children attending out-of-hours services; and enhanced communication for robust safety netting between professionals and parents. The main limitations of this study result from underreporting of safety incidents and variable data quality. Our findings therefore require further exploration in longitudinal studies utilizing case review methods. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights opportunities to reduce iatrogenic harm and avoidable child deaths. Globally, healthcare systems with primary-care-led models of delivery must now examine their existing practices to determine the prevalence and burden of these priority safety issues, and utilize improvement methods to achieve sustainable improvements in care quality.

Nature of Blame in Patient Safety Incident Reports: Mixed Methods Analysis of a National Database.

PURPOSE: A culture of blame and fear of retribution are recognized barriers to reporting patient safety incidents. The extent of blame attribution in safety incident reports, which may reflect the underlying safety culture of health care systems, is unknown. This study set out to explore the nature of blame in family practice safety incident reports. METHODS: We characterized a random sample of family practice patient safety incident reports from the England and Wales National Reporting and Learning System. Reports were analyzed according to prespecified classification systems to describe the incident type, contributory factors, outcomes, and severity of harm. We developed a taxonomy of blame attribution, and we then used descriptive statistical analyses to identify the proportions of blame types and to explore associations between incident characteristics and one type of blame. RESULTS: Health care professionals making family practice incident reports attributed blame to a person in 45% of cases (n = 975 of 2,148; 95% CI, 43%-47%). In 36% of cases, those who reported the incidents attributed fault to another person, whereas 2% of those reporting acknowledged personal responsibility. Blame was commonly associated with incidents where a complaint was anticipated. CONCLUSIONS: The high frequency of blame in these safety, incident reports may reflect a health care culture that leads to blame and retribution, rather than to identifying areas for learning and improvement, and a failure to appreciate the contribution of system factors in others' behavior. Successful improvement in patient safety through the analysis of incident reports is unlikely without achieving a blame-free culture.

The community transformation map: A maturity tool for planning change in community health improvement for equity and well-being.

Transforming communities to be healthier and more equitable prosents a systemic challenge best addressed by those with native knowledge of the system. Community coalitions are a promising structure for tackling local health inequities, if they approach the change process with multiple local stakeholders and with systemic change in mind. Maturity models offer a framework for system assessment by defining sequential stages toward ideal development. Providing coalitions with a structure for self-assessing community change, the Community Transformation Map (CTM) is a maturity model that operationalizes concepts hypothesized to foster systemic change. This 40-item tool encourages self-assessment, dialogue, and reconciliation of community transformation priorities via an appreciative inquiry process. The CTM was created and applied with 18 community coalitions participating in the 100 Million Healthier Lives initiative. It was iteratively drafted with representatives from across the initiative. These coalitions self-administered the CTM four times over 24 months. Coalitions used the CTM to reconcile perspectives, identify priorities, and create transformation action plans. After the fourth administration, ten semistructured interviews were conducted with coalition members. Thematic analysis revealed good contextual validity. Coalitions saw value in the CTM's productive dialogue and the shared understanding it created, but reported perceived burden in conducting repeated administration. The CTM's value is in structuring community members' reflection on complex, systemic problems. The CTM is rooted in international improvement and change principles and continues to be adapted for other change initiatives. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Dietary complexity and hidden costs of prey switching in a generalist top predator.

Variation in predator diet is a critical aspect of food web stability, health, and population dynamics of predator/ prey communities. Quantifying diet, particularly among cryptic species, is extremely challenging, however, and differentiation between demographic subsets of populations is often overlooked.We used prey remains and data taken postmortem from otter Lutra lutra to determine the extent to which dietary variation in a top predator was associated with biotic, spatial, and temporal factors.Biotic data (e.g., sex, weight, and length) and stomach contents were taken from 610 otters found dead across England and Wales between 1994 and 2010. Prey remains were identified to species where possible, using published keys and reference materials. Multi-model inference followed by model prediction was applied to test for and visualize the nature of associations.Evidence for widespread decline in the consumption of eels (Anguilla anguilla) reflected known eel population declines. An association between eel consumption and otter body condition suggested negative consequences for otter nutrition. Consumption of Cottus gobio and stickleback spp. increased, but was unlikely to compensate (there was no association with body condition). More otters with empty stomachs were found over time. Otter sex, body length, and age-class were important biotic predictors of the prey species found, and season, region, and distance from the coast were important abiotic predictors.Our study is unique in its multivariate nature, broad spatial scale, and long-term dataset. Inclusion of biotic data allowed us to reveal important differences in costs and benefits of different prey types, and differences between demographic subsets of the population, overlaid on spatial and temporal variation. Such complexities in otter diet are likely to be paralleled in other predators, and detailed characterization of diet should not be overlooked in efforts to conserve wild populations.

A mixed-methods analysis of patient safety incidents involving opioid substitution treatment with methadone or buprenorphine in community-based care in England and Wales.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Opioid substitution treatment is used in many countries as an effective harm minimization strategy. There is a need for more information about patient safety incidents and the resulting harm relating to this treatment. We aimed to characterize patient safety incidents involving opioid substitution treatment with methadone or buprenorphine in community-based care by: (i) identifying the sources and nature of harm and (ii) describing and interpreting themes to identify priorities to focus future improvement work. DESIGN: Mixed-methods study examining patient safety incident reports involving opioid substitution treatment with either methadone or buprenorphine in community-based care. SETTING: Data submitted between 2005 and 2015 from the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS), a national repository of patient safety incident reports from across England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2284 reports were identified involving patients receiving community-based opioid substitution treatment. MEASUREMENTS: Incident type, contributory factors, incident outcome and severity of harm. Analysis involved data coding, processing and iterative generation of data summaries using descriptive statistical and thematic analysis. FINDINGS: Most risks of harm from opioid substitution treatment came from failure in one of four processes of care delivery: prescribing opioid substitution (n = 151); supervised dispensing (n = 248); non-supervised dispensing (n = 318); and monitoring and communication (n = 1544). Most incidents resulting in harm involved supervised or non-supervised dispensing (n = 91 of 127, 72%). Staff- (e.g. slips during task execution, not following protocols) and organization-related (e.g. poor working conditions or poor continuity of care between services) contributory factors were identified for more than half of incidents. CONCLUSIONS: Risks of harm in delivering opioid substitute treatment in England and Wales appear to arise out of failures in four processes: prescribing opioid substitution, supervised dispensing, non-supervised dispensing and monitoring and communication.

Using Collaborative Coalition Processes to Advance Community Health, Well-Being, and Equity: A Multiple-Case Study Analysis From a National Community Transformation Initiative.

Spreading Community Accelerators Through Learning and Evaluation (SCALE) was a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation-funded initiative from 2015 to 2017 to build capability of 24 community coalitions to advance health, well-being, and equity. The SCALE theory of change had three components: develop leadership capability, build relationships within and between communities, and create an intercommunity system to spread promising ideas. The theory was operationalized through training academies, coaching, and peer-to-peer learning that explicitly addressed equity and systems change. In this article, we describe how SCALE facilitated community transformation related to Collaborating for Equity and Justice Principles 1, 3, 4, and 6. We conducted a multiple-case study approach with two community coalitions including site visits, interviews, and observation to illuminate underlying mechanisms of change by exploring how and why change occurs. Skid Row Women worked with women experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles to address diabetes and food systems. Healthy Livable Communities of Cattaraugus County used a portfolio of projects in order to create system changes to improve population health and increase access to services for people with disabilities in rural New York State. Through our analysis, we describe how two coalitions used SCALE tools for collaborative coalition processes such as aim setting, relationship building, and shared decision making with community residents. Our findings suggest that advancing Collaborating for Equity and Justice principles requires self-reflection and courage; new ways of being in relationship; learning from failure; productive conflict to explicitly address power, racism, and other forms of oppression; and methods to test systems improvement ideas.

Combined heart-liver transplantation for failing Fontan circulation in a late survivor with single-ventricle physiology.

Management of adults with failing Fontan physiology poses many challenges, especially as transplantation offers the only realistic alternative to palliative care. We present the first combined heart and liver transplant performed in Europe, for a late survivor of single ventricle palliation with the Fontan circulation. In addition to the conventional medical and surgical challenges posed, we highlight the management of the associated multi-organ failure with focus on the liver and novel strategies for assessment and optimization.

Multimethod study of a large-scale programme to improve patient safety using a harm-free care approach.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate whether a large-scale two-phase quality improvement programme achieved its aims and to characterise the influences on achievement. SETTING: National Health Service (NHS) in England. PARTICIPANTS: NHS staff. INTERVENTIONS: The programme sought to (1) develop a shared national, regional and locally aligned safety focus for 4 high-cost, high volume harms; (2) establish a new measurement system based on a composite measure of 'harm-free' care and (3) deliver improved outcomes. Phase I involved a quality improvement collaborative intended to involve 100 organisations; phase II used financial incentives for data collection. MEASURES: Multimethod evaluation of the programme. In phase I, analysis of regional plans and of rates of data submission and clinical outcomes reported to the programme. A concurrent process evaluation was conducted of phase I, but only data on submission rates and clinical outcomes were available for phase II. RESULTS: A context of extreme policy-related structural turbulence impacted strongly on phase I. Most regions' plans did not demonstrate full alignment with the national programme; most fell short of recruitment targets and attrition in attendance at the collaborative meetings occurred over time. Though collaborative participants saw the principles underlying the programme as attractive, useful and innovative, they often struggled to convert enthusiasm into change. Developing the measurement system was arduous, yet continued to be met by controversy. Data submission rates remained patchy throughout phase I but improved in reach and consistency in phase II in response to financial incentives. Some evidence of improvement in clinical outcomes over time could be detected but was hard to interpret owing to variability in the denominators. CONCLUSIONS: These findings offer important lessons for large-scale improvement programmes, particularly when they seek to develop novel concepts and measures. External contexts may exert far-reaching influence. The challenges of developing measurement systems should not be underestimated.

Harms from discharge to primary care: mixed methods analysis of incident reports.

BACKGROUND: Discharge from hospital presents significant risks to patient safety, with up to one in five patients experiencing adverse events within 3 weeks of leaving hospital. AIM: To describe the frequency and types of patient safety incidents associated with discharge from secondary to primary care, and commonly described contributory factors to identify recommendations for practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: A mixed methods analysis of 598 patient safety incident reports in England and Wales related to 'Discharge' from the National Reporting and Learning System. METHOD: Detailed data coding (with 20% double-coding), data summaries generated using descriptive statistical analysis, and thematic analysis of special-case sample of reports. Incident type, contributory factors, type, and level of harm were described, informing recommendations for future practice. RESULTS: A total of 598 eligible reports were analysed. The four main themes were: errors in discharge communication (n = 151; 54% causing harm); errors in referrals to community care (n = 136; 73% causing harm); errors in medication (n = 97; 87% causing harm); and lack of provision of care adjuncts such as dressings (n = 62; 94% causing harm). Common contributory factors were staff factors (not following referral protocols); and organisational factors (lack of clear guidelines or inefficient processes). Improvement opportunities include developing and testing electronic discharge methods with agreed minimum information requirements and unified referrals systems to community care providers; and promoting a safety culture with 'safe discharge' checklists, discharge coordinators, and family involvement. CONCLUSION: Significant harm was evident due to deficits in the discharge process. Interventions in this area need to be evaluated and learning shared widely.

Increasing the generalisability of improvement research with an improvement replication programme.

If a quality improvement is found effective in one setting, would the same effects be found elsewhere? Could the same change be implemented in another setting? These are just two of the 'generalisation questions' which decision-makers face in considering whether to act on reported improvement. In this paper, some of the issues are considered and a programme of research for testing improvements in different settings is proposed to build theory and practical guidance about implementation and results in different settings.