Human rights education in patient care: A literature review and critical discussion.

The identification of human rights issues has become more prominent in statements from national and international nursing organisations such as the American Nurses Association and the United Kingdom's Royal College of Nursing with the International Council of Nursing asserting that human rights are fundamental to and inherent in nursing and that nurses have an obligation to promote people's health rights at all times in all places.However, concern has been expressed about this development. Human rights may be seen as the imposition of legal considerations for nurses and other healthcare workers to bear in mind, as yet more responsibilities with the consequent fear of litigation. Although a more hopeful scenario is that consideration of human rights is something that is supportive of good practice.If this more hopeful scenario is to be realised, the role of education will be crucial. As with human rights generally, human rights education is a global phenomenon, a practice-orientated expression of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the goal of human rights education is to build a culture of respect and action for human rights for all.However, the nature of human rights has long been contested. A 'mapping exercise' of the academic literature on human rights identified 'four schools' or 'ideal types' that have shaped thinking about human rights. This sets out the conceptual context in which human rights problems are defined and solutions are proposed, which is particularly important for human rights education. However, it also complicates the picture. The different approaches taken by the four 'types' would likely lead to different outcomes in terms of human rights education.It is timely to discuss the nature of human rights education and examine its potential for impact on patient care. This will involve identifying the challenges and potential benefits of this approach and analysing the implications for professional practice.

Changes in weekend and weekday care quality of emergency medical admissions to 20 hospitals in England during implementation of the 7-day services national health policy.

BACKGROUND: In 2013, the English National Health Service launched the policy of 7-day services to improve care quality and outcomes for weekend emergency admissions. AIMS: To determine whether the quality of care of emergency medical admissions is worse at weekends, and whether this has changed during implementation of 7-day services. METHODS: Using data from 20 acute hospital Trusts in England, we performed randomly selected structured case record reviews of patients admitted to hospital as emergencies at weekends and on weekdays between financial years 2012-2013 and 2016-2017. Senior doctor ('specialist') involvement was determined from annual point prevalence surveys. The primary outcome was the rate of clinical errors. Secondary outcomes included error-related adverse event rates, global quality of care and four indicators of good practice. RESULTS: Seventy-nine clinical reviewers reviewed 4000 admissions, 800 in duplicate. Errors, adverse events and care quality were not significantly different between weekend and weekday admissions, but all improved significantly between epochs, particularly errors most likely influenced by doctors (clinical assessment, diagnosis, treatment, prescribing and communication): error rate OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87; adverse event OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.69; care quality OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87; all adjusted for age, sex and ethnicity. Postadmission in-hospital care processes improved between epochs and were better for weekend admissions (vital signs with National Early Warning Score and timely specialist review). Preadmission processes in the community were suboptimal at weekends and deteriorated between epochs (fewer family doctor referrals, more patients with chronic disease or palliative care designation). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Hospital care quality of emergency medical admissions is not worse at weekends and has improved during implementation of the 7-day services policy. Causal pathways for the weekend effect may extend into the prehospital setting.

Magnitude and modifiers of the weekend effect in hospital admissions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the magnitude of the weekend effect, defined as differences in patient outcomes between weekend and weekday hospital admissions, and factors influencing it. DESIGN: A systematic review incorporating Bayesian meta-analyses and meta-regression. DATA SOURCES: We searched seven databases including MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 2000 to April 2015, and updated the MEDLINE search up to November 2017. Eligibility criteria: primary research studies published in peer-reviewed journals of unselected admissions (not focusing on specific conditions) investigating the weekend effect on mortality, adverse events, length of hospital stay (LoS) or patient satisfaction. RESULTS: For the systematic review, we included 68 studies (70 articles) covering over 640 million admissions. Of these, two-thirds were conducted in the UK (n=24) or USA (n=22). The pooled odds ratio (OR) for weekend mortality effect across admission types was 1.16 (95% credible interval 1.10 to 1.23). The weekend effect appeared greater for elective (1.70, 1.08 to 2.52) than emergency (1.11, 1.06 to 1.16) or maternity (1.06, 0.89 to 1.29) admissions. Further examination of the literature shows that these estimates are influenced by methodological, clinical and service factors: at weekends, fewer patients are admitted to hospital, those who are admitted are more severely ill and there are differences in care pathways before and after admission. Evidence regarding the weekend effect on adverse events and LoS is weak and inconsistent, and that on patient satisfaction is sparse. The overall quality of evidence for inferring weekend/weekday difference in hospital care quality from the observed weekend effect was rated as 'very low' based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework. CONCLUSIONS: The weekend effect is unlikely to have a single cause, or to be a reliable indicator of care quality at weekends. Further work should focus on underlying mechanisms and examine care processes in both hospital and community. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016036487.

Sicker patients account for the weekend mortality effect among adult emergency admissions to a large hospital trust.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the higher weekend admission mortality risk is attributable to increased severity of illness. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of 4 years weekend and weekday adult emergency admissions to a university teaching hospital in England. OUTCOME MEASURES: 30-day postadmission weekend:weekday mortality ratios adjusted for severity of illness (baseline National Early Warning Score (NEWS)), routes of admission to hospital, transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU) and demographics. RESULTS: Despite similar emergency department daily attendance rates, fewer patients were admitted on weekends (mean admission rate 91/day vs 120/day) because of fewer general practitioner referrals. Weekend admissions were sicker than weekday (mean NEWS 1.8 vs 1.7, p=0.008), more likely to undergo transfer to ICU within 24 hours (4.2% vs 3.0%), spent longer in hospital (median 3 days vs 2 days) and less likely to experience same-day discharge (17.2% vs 21.9%) (all p values <0.001).The crude 30-day postadmission mortality ratio for weekend admission (OR=1.13; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.19) was attenuated using standard adjustment (OR=1.11; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.17). In patients for whom NEWS values were available (90%), the crude OR (1.07; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.13) was not affected with standard adjustment. Adjustment using NEWS alone nullified the weekend effect (OR=1.02; 0.96-1.08).NEWS completion rates were higher on weekends (91.7%) than weekdays (89.5%). Missing NEWS was associated with direct transfer to intensive care bypassing electronic data capture. Missing NEWS in non-ICU weekend patients was associated with a higher mortality and fewer same-day discharges than weekdays. CONCLUSIONS: Patients admitted to hospital on weekends are sicker than those admitted on weekdays. The cause of the weekend effect may lie in community services.

Quality and safety of in-hospital care for acute medical patients at weekends: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The increased mortality risk associated with weekend admission to hospital (the 'weekend effect') has been reported across many health systems. More recently research has focused on causal mechanisms. Variations in the organisation and delivery of in-hospital care between weekends and weekdays have been identified, but this is not always to the detriment of weekend admissions, and the impact on mortality is uncertain. The insights of frontline staff and patients have been neglected. This article reports a qualitative study of patients and clinicians, to explore their views on quality and safety of care at weekends. METHODS: We conducted focus groups and interviews with clinicians and patients with experience of acute medical care, recruited from three UK hospital Trusts. We analysed the data using a thematic analysis approach, aided by the use of NVivo, to explore quality and safety of care at weekends. RESULTS: We held four focus groups and completed six in-depth interviews, with 19 clinicians and 12 patients. Four threats to quality and safety were identified as being more prominent at weekends, relating to i) the rescue and stabilisation of sick patients; ii) monitoring and responding to deterioration; iii) timely accurate management of the therapeutic pathway; iv) errors of omission and commission. CONCLUSIONS: At weekends patients and staff are well aware of suboptimal staffing numbers, skill mix and access to resources at weekends, and identify that emergency admissions are prioritised over those already hospitalised. The consequences in terms of quality and safety and patient experience of care are undesirable. Our findings suggest the value of focusing on care processes and systems resilience over the weekends, and how these can be better supported, even in the limited resource environment that exists in many hospitals at weekends.

Two-epoch cross-sectional case record review protocol comparing quality of care of hospital emergency admissions at weekends versus weekdays.

INTRODUCTION: The mortality associated with weekend admission to hospital (the 'weekend effect') has for many years been attributed to deficiencies in quality of hospital care, often assumed to be due to suboptimal senior medical staffing at weekends. This protocol describes a case note review to determine whether there are differences in care quality for emergency admissions (EAs) to hospital at weekends compared with weekdays, and whether the difference has reduced over time as health policies have changed to promote 7-day services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Cross-sectional two-epoch case record review of 20 acute hospital Trusts in England. Anonymised case records of 4000 EAs to hospital, 2000 at weekends and 2000 on weekdays, covering two epochs (financial years 2012-2013 and 2016-2017). Admissions will be randomly selected across the whole of each epoch from Trust electronic patient records. Following training, structured implicit case reviews will be conducted by consultants or senior registrars (senior residents) in acute medical specialities (60 case records per reviewer), and limited to the first 7 days following hospital admission. The co-primary outcomes are the weekend:weekday admission ratio of errors per case record, and a global assessment of care quality on a Likert scale. Error rates will be analysed using mixed effects logistic regression models, and care quality using ordinal regression methods. Secondary outcomes include error typology, error-related adverse events and any correlation between error rates and staffing. The data will also be used to inform a parallel health economics analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The project has received ethics approval from the South West Wales Research Ethics Committee (REC): reference 13/WA/0372. Informed consent is not required for accessing anonymised patient case records from which patient identifiers had been removed. The findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications in high-quality journals and through local High-intensity Specialist-Led Acute Care (HiSLAC) leads at the 121 hospitals that make up the HiSLAC Collaborative.

The 'weekend effect' in acute medicine: a protocol for a team-based ethnography of weekend care for medical patients in acute hospital settings.

INTRODUCTION: It is now well-recognised that patients admitted to hospital on weekends are at higher risk of death than those admitted during weekdays. However, the causes of this 'weekend effect' are poorly understood. Some contend that there is a deficit of medical staff on weekends resulting in poorer quality care, whereas others find that patients admitted to hospital on weekends are sicker and therefore at higher risk of adverse outcomes. Clarifying the causal pathway is clearly important in order to identify effective solutions. In this article we describe an ethnographic approach to evaluating the organisation and delivery of medical care on weekends compared with weekdays, with a specific focus on the role of medical staff as part of National Health Service England's plan to implement 7-day services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct an ethnographic study of 20 acute hospitals in England between April 2016 and March 2018 as part of the High-intensity Specialist-Led Acute Care project (www.hislac.org). Data will be collected through observations and shadowing, and interviews with staff, in 10 hospitals with higher intensity specialist (consultant) staffing on weekends and 10 with lower intensity specialist staffing. Interviews will be conducted with up to 20 patients sampled from two high-intensity and two low-intensity sites. We will coordinate, compare and contrast observations across our team of ethnographers. Analysis will be both in-depth and cross-cutting, exploring specific features within individual sites and making comparisons between them. We outline how data collection and analysis will be facilitated and organised. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The project has received ethics approval from the South West Wales Research Ethics Committee: Reference 13/WA/0372. Informed consent will be obtained for all interview participants. The findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications in high-quality journals and at national and international conferences.

Weekend specialist intensity and admission mortality in acute hospital trusts in England: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Increased mortality rates associated with weekend hospital admission (the so-called weekend effect) have been attributed to suboptimum staffing levels of specialist consultants. However, evidence for a causal association is elusive, and the magnitude of the weekend specialist deficit remains unquantified. This uncertainty could hamper efforts by national health systems to introduce 7 day health services. We aimed to examine preliminary associations between specialist intensity and weekend admission mortality across the English National Health Service. METHODS: Eligible hospital trusts were those in England receiving unselected emergency admissions. On Sunday June 15 and Wednesday June 18, 2014, we undertook a point prevalence survey of hospital specialists (consultants) to obtain data relating to the care of patients admitted as emergencies. We defined specialist intensity at each trust as the self-reported estimated number of specialist hours per ten emergency admissions between 0800 h and 2000 h on Sunday and Wednesday. With use of data for all adult emergency admissions for financial year 2013-14, we compared weekend to weekday admission risk of mortality with the Sunday to Wednesday specialist intensity ratio within each trust. We stratified trusts by size quintile. FINDINGS: 127 of 141 eligible acute hospital trusts agreed to participate; 115 (91%) trusts contributed data to the point prevalence survey. Of 34,350 clinicians surveyed, 15,537 (45%) responded. Substantially fewer specialists were present providing care to emergency admissions on Sunday (1667 [11%]) than on Wednesday (6105 [42%]). Specialists present on Sunday spent 40% more time caring for emergency patients than did those present on Wednesday (mean 5·74 h [SD 3·39] vs 3·97 h [3·31]); however, the median specialist intensity on Sunday was only 48% (IQR 40-58) of that on Wednesday. The Sunday to Wednesday intensity ratio was less than 0·7 in 104 (90%) of the contributing trusts. Mortality risk among patients admitted at weekends was higher than among those admitted on weekdays (adjusted odds ratio 1·10, 95% CI 1·08-1·11; p<0·0001). There was no significant association between Sunday to Wednesday specialist intensity ratios and weekend to weekday mortality ratios (r -0·042; p=0·654). INTERPRETATION: This cross-sectional analysis did not detect a correlation between weekend staffing of hospital specialists and mortality risk for emergency admissions. Further investigation is needed to evaluate whole-system secular change during the implementation of 7 day services. Policy makers should exercise caution before attributing the weekend effect mainly to differences in specialist staffing. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme.

The magnitude and mechanisms of the weekend effect in hospital admissions: A protocol for a mixed methods review incorporating a systematic review and framework synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Growing literature has demonstrated that patients admitted to hospital during weekends tend to have less favourable outcomes, including increased mortality, compared with similar patients admitted during weekdays. Major policy interventions such as the 7-day services programme in the UK NHS have been initiated to reduce this weekend effect, although the mechanisms behind the effect are unclear. Here, we propose a mixed methods review to systematically examine the literature surrounding the magnitude and mechanisms of the weekend effect. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, HMIC, EMBASE, EthOS, CPCI and the Cochrane Library were searched from Jan 2000 to April 2015 using terms related to 'weekends or out-of-hours' and 'hospital admissions'. The 5404 retrieved records were screened by the review team, and will feed into two component reviews: a systematic review of the magnitude of the weekend effect and a framework synthesis of the mechanisms of the weekend effect. A repeat search of MEDLINE will be conducted mid-2016 to update both component reviews. The systematic review will include quantitative studies of non-specific hospital admissions. The primary outcome is the weekend effect on mortality, which will be estimated using a Bayesian random effects meta-analysis. Weekend effects on adverse events, length of hospital stay and patient experience will also be examined. The development of the framework synthesis has been informed by the initial scoping of the literature and focus group discussions. The synthesis will examine both quantitative and qualitative studies that have compared the processes and quality of care between weekends and weekdays, and explicate the underlying mechanisms of the weekend effect. DISCUSSION: The weekend effect is a complex phenomenon that has major implications for the organisation of health services. Its magnitude and underlying mechanisms have been subject to heated debate. Published literature reviews have adopted restricted scopes or methods and mainly focused on quantitative evidence. This proposed review intends to provide a comprehensive and in-depth synthesis of diverse evidence to inform future policy and research aiming to address the weekend effect. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2016: CRD42016036487.

Exploring senior nurses' experiences of leading organizational change.

Purpose - The aim of this paper is to explore Senior nurses' experiences of leading organizational change. There is a substantial literature reporting middle-level nurse managers' experiences of change; however, there is less evidence concerning senior nurses' perspectives. In view of this, interview data collected from senior nurses, as part of a study of major organizational change, were analysed to redress this imbalance. Design/methodology/approach - In-depth semi-structured interviews (n = 14) were conducted with senior nurses (between 2009 and 2012). Findings - Senior nurses' activity centred on leadership and workforce issues, internal influences and external pressures. In periods of change, appropriate leadership was vital, and "weak" leaders were considered to have an adverse effect on teams. Concerns were expressed about financial strictures and their impact on patient care and service provision. The senior nurses were striving to provide the best quality of service delivery with the limited resources available. Concentration on operational matters was necessary to maintain stability in periods of change. However, this prevented senior nurses from influencing strategic decision-making in their organizations. Practical implications - If senior nurses are to realise their potential to operate at a strategic level, they need to be given time and support to lead, rather than just react to change. This research emphasises the importance of a "nursing voice" to inform board-level decisions and maintain a focus on patient care. Originality/value - This research sheds light on the work of a key group of staff in health-care organizations. Understanding senior nurses' experience of and contribution to change is a useful contribution to health services research.

Decisions and delays within stroke patients' route to the hospital: a qualitative study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We examine acute stroke patients' decisions and delays en route to the hospital after onset of symptoms. METHODS: This was a qualitative study carried out in the West Midlands, United Kingdom. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 30 patients (6 accompanied by partners). Patients were asked about their previous experience of having had a stroke and their initial engagement with health services. "One sheet of paper" and thematic analyses were used. RESULTS: Three potential types of delay were identified from onset of symptoms to accessing stroke care in the hospital: primary delays caused by lack of recognition of symptoms or not dealing with symptoms immediately, secondary delays caused by initial contact with nonemergency services, and tertiary delays in which health service providers did not interpret the patients' presenting symptoms as suggestive of stroke. The main factors determining the speed of action by patients were the presence and influence of a bystander and the perceived seriousness of symptoms. CONCLUSION: Despite campaigns to increase public awareness of stroke symptoms, the behavior of both patients and health service providers apparently led to delays in the recognition of and response to stroke symptoms, potentially reducing access to optimum and timely acute specialist assessment and treatment for acute stroke.

Protocol for an observation and implementation study investigating optimisation of the management of stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA).

INTRODUCTION: Patients benefit from early and intensive treatment in both acute ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack. Recent audits of acute stroke/transient ischaemic attack care suggest that although standards have improved, current services still fall short of optimal care. The aim of this study is to establish a database of patients accessing stroke services. Data will be collected and analysed to provide individualised feedback to healthcare professionals who can then use these findings to develop strategies for service improvement. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This longitudinal observational study will evolve with the ongoing findings from the research output. The project will consist of three phases: assessment of current practice, feedback of findings and evaluation of service change. Consecutive patients will be recruited from participating hospitals, and identifiable data will be collected to link records from the Primary Care, Secondary Care and Emergency Services. As this study focuses on observation of current practice, a sample size calculation is not deemed appropriate. Patients will be sent follow-up questionnaires examining quality of life at 3 and 12 months post-event. Qualitative interviews will examine the care pathway through the experiences of patients, their carers, healthcare personnel and commissioners. Collected data will be used in economic analyses, which will evaluate the impact of current care and service redesign on the NHS costs and patient outcomes (death and quality of life). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this study has been obtained from the National Research Ethics Committee (reference; 09/H0716/71), and site-specific R&D approval has been acquired from the relevant NHS trusts. All findings will be presented at relevant healthcare/academic conferences and written up for publication in peer-reviewed journals. Results will be fed back to patients and participating trusts through a series of reports and presentations. These will be used to facilitate discussions about service redesign and implementation.