The aspects of healthcare quality that are important to health professionals and patients: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: Existing quality of care frameworks insufficiently integrate the perspectives of physicians, nurses and patients. We collected narrative accounts from these three groups to explore if their perspectives might add new content to these existing definitions. METHODS: Ninety-seven descriptions of "good" and "poor" care episodes were collected from a convenience sample of physicians, nurses and outpatients at eight regional hospitals. Two coders classified the narrative contents into themes related to structures, processes and outcomes of care. RESULTS: The physicians, nurses and patients raised the following "quality of care" aspects: Successful communication among staff, with patients and care companions; staff motivation; frequency of knowledge errors; prioritization of patient-preferred outcomes; institutional emphasis on building "quality cultures"; and organizational implementation of fluid system procedures. CONCLUSION: Respondents primarily referred to care processes in their descriptions of "quality of care." "Hippocratic pride" (in response to care successes) and "Rapid reactivity" (in response to (near) failures) emerged as two new outcome indicators of high-quality care. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This study provides a first qualitative fundament for understanding the components of "quality of care" from a triangulated frontline perspective. Future research needs to validate our findings with quantitative data to explore their usefulness for completing existing quality frameworks.

Learning from diagnostic errors to improve patient safety when GPs work in or alongside emergency departments: incorporating realist methodology into patient safety incident report analysis.

BACKGROUND: Increasing demand on emergency healthcare systems has prompted introduction of new healthcare service models including the provision of GP services in or alongside emergency departments. In England this led to a policy proposal and £100million (US$130million) of funding for all emergency departments to have co-located GP services. However, there is a lack of evidence for whether such service models are effective and safe. We examined diagnostic errors reported in patient safety incident reports to develop theories to explain how and why they occurred to inform potential priority areas for improvement and inform qualitative data collection at case study sites to further refine the theories. METHODS: We used a mixed-methods design using exploratory descriptive analysis to identify the most frequent and harmful sources of diagnostic error and thematic analysis, incorporating realist methodology to refine theories from an earlier rapid realist review, to describe how and why the events occurred and could be mitigated, to inform improvement recommendations. We used two UK data sources: Coroners' reports to prevent future deaths (30.7.13-14.08.18) and National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) patient safety incident reports (03.01.05-30.11.15). RESULTS: Nine Coroners' reports (from 1347 community and hospital reports, 2013-2018) and 217 NRLS reports (from 13 million, 2005-2015) were identified describing diagnostic error related to GP services in or alongside emergency departments. Initial theories to describe potential priority areas for improvement included: difficulty identifying appropriate patients for the GP service; under-investigation and misinterpretation of diagnostic tests; and inadequate communication and referral pathways between the emergency and GP services. High-risk presentations included: musculoskeletal injury, chest pain, headache, calf pain and sick children. CONCLUSION: Initial theories include the following topics as potential priority areas for improvement interventions and evaluation to minimise the risk of diagnostic errors when GPs work in or alongside emergency departments: a standardised initial assessment with streaming guidance based on local service provision; clinical decision support for high-risk conditions; and standardised computer systems, communication and referral pathways between emergency and GP services. These theories require refinement and testing with qualitative data collection from case study (hospital) sites.

Identifying safe care processes when GPs work in or alongside emergency departments: a realist evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Increasing pressure on emergency services has led to the development of different models of care delivery including GPs working in or alongside emergency departments (EDs), but with a lack of evidence for patient safety outcomes. AIM: This study aimed to explore how care processes work and how patient safety incidents associated with GPs working in ED settings may be mitigated. DESIGN AND SETTING: Realist methodology with a purposive sample of 13 EDs in England and Wales with different GP service models. The study sought to understand the relationship between contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes to develop theories about how and why patient safety incidents may occur, and how safe care was perceived to be delivered. METHOD: Qualitative data were collected (observations, semi-structured audio-recorded staff interviews, and local patient safety incident reports). Data were coded using 'if, then, because' statements to refine initial theories developed from an earlier rapid realist literature review and analysis of a sample of national patient safety incident reports. RESULTS: The authors developed a programme theory to describe how safe patient care was perceived to be delivered in these service models, including: an experienced streaming nurse using local guidance and early warning scores; support for GPs' clinical decision making, with clear governance processes relevant to the intended role (traditional GP approach or emergency medicine approach); and strong clinical leadership to promote teamwork and improve communication between services. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study can be used as a focus for more in-depth human factors investigations to optimise work conditions in this complex care delivery setting.

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.

Colorectal cancer incidence among young adults in England: Trends by anatomical sub-site and deprivation.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer incidence in the UK and other high-income countries has been increasing rapidly among young adults. This is the first analysis of colorectal cancer incidence trends by sub-site and socioeconomic deprivation in young adults in a European country. METHODS: We examined age-specific national trends in colorectal cancer incidence among all adults (20-99 years) diagnosed during 1971-2014, using Joinpoint regression to analyse data from the population-based cancer registry for England. We fitted a generalised linear model to the incidence rates, with a maximum of two knots. We present the annual percentage change in incidence rates in up to three successive calendar periods, by sex, age, deprivation and anatomical sub-site. RESULTS: Annual incidence rates among the youngest adults (20-39 years) fell slightly between 1971 and the early 1990s, but increased rapidly from then onwards. Incidence Rates (IR) among adults 20-29 years rose from 0.8 per 100,000 in 1993 to 2.8 per 100,000 in 2014, an average annual increase of 8%. An annual increase of 8.1% was observed for adults aged 30-39 years during 2005-2014. Among the two youngest age groups (20-39 years), the average annual increase for the right colon was 5.2% between 1991 and 2010, rising to 19.4% per year between 2010 (IR = 1.2) and 2014 (IR = 2.5). The large increase in incidence rates for cancers of the right colon since 2010 were more marked among the most affluent young adults. Smaller but substantial increases were observed for cancers of the left colon and rectum. Incidence rates in those aged 50 years and older remained stable or decreased over the same periods. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the overall stabilising trend of colorectal cancer incidence in England, incidence rates have increased rapidly among young adults (aged 20-39 years). Changes in the prevalence of obesity and other risk factors may have affected the young population but more research is needed on the cause of the observed birth cohort effect. Extension of mass screening may not be justifiable due to the low number of newly diagnosed cases but clinicians should be alert to this trend.

Patient safety in palliative care: A mixed-methods study of reports to a national database of serious incidents.

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving palliative care are vulnerable to patient safety incidents but little is known about the extent of harm caused or the origins of unsafe care in this population. AIM: To quantify and qualitatively analyse serious incident reports in order to understand the causes and impact of unsafe care in a population receiving palliative care. DESIGN: A mixed-methods approach was used. Following quantification of type of incidents and their location, a qualitative analysis using a modified framework method was used to interpret themes in reports to examine the underlying causes and the nature of resultant harms. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Reports to a national database of 'serious incidents requiring investigation' involving patients receiving palliative care in the National Health Service (NHS) in England during the 12-year period, April 2002 to March 2014. RESULTS: A total of 475 reports were identified: 266 related to pressure ulcers, 91 to medication errors, 46 to falls, 21 to healthcare-associated infections (HCAIs), 18 were other instances of disturbed dying, 14 were allegations against health professions, 8 transfer incidents, 6 suicides and 5 other concerns. The frequency of report types differed according to the care setting. Underlying causes included lack of palliative care experience, under-resourcing and poor service coordination. Resultant harms included worsened symptoms, disrupted dying, serious injury and hastened death. CONCLUSION: Unsafe care presents a risk of significant harm to patients receiving palliative care. Improvements in the coordination of care delivery alongside wider availability of specialist palliative care support may reduce this risk.

Patterns of regional variation of opioid prescribing in primary care in England: a retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are a widely prescribed class of drug with potentially harmful short-term and long-term side effects. There are concerns about the amounts of these drugs being prescribed in England given that they are increasingly considered ineffective in the context of long-term non-cancer pain, which is one of the major reasons for their prescription. AIM: To assess the amount and type of opioids prescribed in primary care in England, and patterns of regional variation in prescribing. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective observational study using publicly available government data from various sources pertaining to opioids prescribed in primary practice in England and Indices of Social Deprivation. METHOD: Official government data were analysed for opioid prescriptions from August 2010 to February 2014. The total amount of opioid prescribed was calculated and standardised to allow for geographical comparisons. RESULTS: The total amount of opioid prescribed, in equivalent milligrams of morphine, increased (r = 0.48) over the study period. More opioids were prescribed in the north than in the south of England (r = 0.66, P<0.0001), and more opioids were prescribed in areas of greater social deprivation (r = 0.56, P<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Long-term opioid prescribing is increasing despite poor efficacy for non-cancer pain, potential harm, and incompatibility with best practice. Questions of equality of care arise from higher prescription rates in the north of England and in areas of greater social deprivation. A national registry of patients with high opioid use would improve patient safety for this high-risk demographic, as well as provide more focused epidemiological data regarding patterns of prescribing.

Serious incidents after death: content analysis of incidents reported to a national database.

Objectives To describe serious incidents occurring in the management of patient remains after their death. Design Incidents occurring after patient deaths were analysed using content analysis to determine what happened, why it happened and the outcome. Setting The Strategic Executive Information System database of serious incidents requiring investigation occurring in the National Health Service in England. Participants All cases describing an incident that occurred following death, regardless of the age of the patient. Main outcome measures The nature of the incident, the underlying cause or causes of the incident and the outcome of the incident. Results One hundred and thirty-two incidents were analysed; these related to the storage, management or disposal of deceased patient remains. Fifty-four incidents concerned problems with the storage of bodies or body parts. Forty-three incidents concerned problems with the management of bodies, including 25 errors in postmortem examination, or postmortems on the wrong body. Thirty-one incidents related to the disposal of bodies, 25 bodies were released from the mortuary to undertakers in error; of these, nine were buried or cremated by the wrong family. The reported underlying causes were similar to those known to be associated with safety incidents occurring before death and included weaknesses in or failures to follow protocol and procedure, poor communication and informal working practices. Conclusions Serious incidents in the management of deceased patient remains have significant implications for families, hospitals and the health service more broadly. Safe mortuary care may be improved by applying lessons learned from existing patient safety work.

What stage are low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) at with patient safety curriculum implementation and what are the barriers to implementation? A two-stage cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: The improvement of safety in healthcare worldwide depends in part on the knowledge, skills and attitudes of staff providing care. Greater patient safety content in health professional education and training programmes has been advocated internationally. While WHO Patient Safety Curriculum Guides (for Medical Schools and Multi-Professional Curricula) have been widely disseminated in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) over the last several years, little is known about patient safety curriculum implementation beyond high-income countries. The present study examines patient safety curriculum implementation in LMICs. METHODS: Two cross-sectional surveys were carried out. First, 88 technical officers in Ministries of Health and WHO country offices were surveyed to identify the pattern of patient safety curricula at country level. A second survey followed that gathered information from 71 people in a position to provide institution-level perspectives on patient safety curriculum implementation. RESULTS: The majority, 69% (30/44), of the countries were either considering whether to implement a patient safety curriculum or actively planning, rather than actually implementing, or embedding one. Most organisations recognised the need for patient safety education and training and felt a safety curriculum was compatible with the values of their organisation; however, important faculty-level barriers to patient safety curriculum implementation were identified. Key structural markers, such as dedicated financial resources and relevant assessment tools to evaluate trainees' patient safety knowledge and skills, were in place in fewer than half of organisations studied. CONCLUSIONS: Greater attention to patient safety curriculum implementation is needed. The barriers to patient safety curriculum implementation we identified in LMICs are not unique to these regions. We propose a framework to act as a global standard for patient safety curriculum implementation. Educating leaders through the system in order to embed patient safety culture in education and clinical settings is a critical first step.

Deaths following prehospital safety incidents: an analysis of a national database.

INTRODUCTION: Ensuring patient safety in the prehospital environment is difficult due to the unpredictable nature of the workload and the uncontrolled situations that care is provided in. Studying previous safety incidents can help understand risks and take action to mitigate them. We present an analysis of safety incidents related to patient deaths in ambulance services in England. METHODS: All incidents related to a patient death reported to the National Reporting and Learning System from an ambulance service between 1 June 2010 and 31 October 2012 were subjected to thematic analysis to identify the failings that led to the incident. RESULTS: Sixty-nine incidents were analysed, equating to one safety incident-related death per 168 000 calls received. Just three event categories were identified: delayed response (59%, 41/69), shortfalls in clinical care (35%, 24/69) and injury during transit (6%, 4/69). Primary failures differed for the categories: problems with dispatch caused the majority of delays in response, with equipment problems and bad weather accounting for the remainder. Failure to provide necessary care was predominantly caused by clinical misjudgements by ambulance staff and equipment issues underlay incidents that led to a patient injury. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements intended to address safety related mortality in the ambulance service should include ensuring adequate equipping and resourcing of ambulance services, improving coordination and decision-making during dispatch and supporting individual staff members in the difficult decisions they are faced with.

The Association Between Chronic Pain and Cardiac Disease: A Cross-sectional Population Study.

OBJECTIVES: Chronic pain may increase the risk of cardiac disease, but the extent to which confounding variables account for this association has yet to be satisfactorily established. This study aims to examine the possibility of an independent association between these 2 variables. METHODS: We applied logistic regression analysis to data from 8596 adults surveyed in a population study of the health of the population of England. The association between cardiac disease (angina and/or myocardial infarction) and chronic pain (pain lasting >3 months) was explored, taking account of 10 potentially confounding variables including the regular use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. RESULTS: Participants reporting chronic pain (n=3023) were more likely to experience cardiac disease than those without pain: odds ratio (OR), 1.55; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.15-2.07. Subsets of participants fulfilling various criteria for high-intensity chronic pain demonstrated stronger associations with cardiac disease suggesting a "dose-response" element to the relationship: chronic widespread pain (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.42-7.68); higher-disability chronic pain (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.71-3.23); and higher average chronic pain score (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.40-2.71). Adjustment for regular prescription of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs did not reduce the association of chronic pain with cardiac disease. DISCUSSION: Patients reporting chronic pain, in particular those most severely affected, may be at significantly increased risk of cardiac disease. Future studies should focus on determining whether reducing the impact of chronic pain can improve cardiac health.

How safe is primary care? A systematic review.

IMPORTANCE: Improving patient safety is at the forefront of policy and practice. While considerable progress has been made in understanding the frequency, causes and consequences of error in hospitals, less is known about the safety of primary care. OBJECTIVE: We investigated how often patient safety incidents occur in primary care and how often these were associated with patient harm. EVIDENCE REVIEW: We searched 18 databases and contacted international experts to identify published and unpublished studies available between 1 January 1980 and 31 July 2014. Patient safety incidents of any type were eligible. Eligible studies were critically appraised using validated instruments and data were descriptively and narratively synthesised. FINDINGS: Nine systematic reviews and 100 primary studies were included. Studies reported between <1 and 24 patient safety incidents per 100 consultations. The median from population-based record review studies was 2-3 incidents for every 100 consultations/records reviewed. It was estimated that around 4% of these incidents may be associated with severe harm, defined as significantly impacting on a patient's well-being, including long-term physical or psychological issues or death (range <1% to 44% of incidents). Incidents relating to diagnosis and prescribing were most likely to result in severe harm. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Millions of people throughout the world use primary care services on any given day. This review suggests that safety incidents are relatively common, but most do not result in serious harm that reaches the patient. Diagnostic and prescribing incidents are the most likely to result in avoidable harm. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This systematic review is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42012002304).