'Where is the ECG machine?': a quality improvement project using WhatsApp to improve the efficiency in locating shared medical devices in an inpatient unit.

Access to medical devices are vital to deliver safe patient care. In the context of constrained resources, however, clinical areas often have insufficient basic equipment, which tend to be shared among multiple clinical teams. This can result in delayed patient management and reduced institutional productivity. In our experience, in 2019, while working at Carseview Centre, an inpatient mental health unit in Dundee (National Health Service Tayside), there was only one functioning ECG machine shared between the five wards.Using the work WhatsApp chat, we aimed to facilitate better sharing of the one machine. Plan, do, study, act (PDSA) 1 intervention introduced the project protocol, which encouraged doctors to post a photo of the device after use, captioned with its location. PDSA 2 involved printing a physical copy of the memorandum and attaching it to the machine to prompt further compliance. In PDSA 3, concise photo-posting guidelines were established and adherence was encouraged to mitigate concerns for potential confidential-data leaks.A dynamic outcome measure, the overall effectiveness metric (OEM), was conceived to prospectively monitor the effectiveness of our interventions. An OEM ≥1 indicates engagement and thereby improvement, whereby <1 indicates no change compared with baseline.The intervention in PDSA 1 was a success with an OEM of 3.5. Although no actual data leaks occurred, a potential for concern was raised by a senior doctor. This limited engagement with the protocol during PDSA 2 and 3, causing the OEM to decline to <1 towards the end of the project. Sixty percent reported that the protocol saved them time in locating the machine.Individual factors, mainly frustration with the current situation, was a primary driver for the initial engagement among doctors. Although other factors such as senior doctor buy-in, may play a greater role in directing longevity of a technology-based quality improvement solution.

Secondary care interface: optimising communication between teams within secondary care to improve the rehabilitation journey for older people.

Effective communication between members of the multidisciplinary team is imperative for patient safety. Within the Medicine for the Elderly wards at Royal Victoria Hospital (RVH) in Dundee, we identified an inefficient process of information-sharing between the orthopaedics outpatient department (OPD) at the main teaching hospital and our hospital's rehabilitation teams, and sought to improve this by introducing several changes to the work system. Our aim was for all patients who attended the OPD clinic to have a plan communicated to the RVH team within 24 hours.Before our intervention, clinic letters containing important instructions for ongoing rehabilitation were dictated by the OPD team, transcribed and uploaded to an electronic system before the RVH team could access them. We analysed clinic attendances over a 4-week period and found that it took 15 days on average for letters to be shared with the RVH teams. We worked with both teams to develop a clinical communication tool and new processes, aiming to expedite the sharing of key information. Patients attended the OPD with this form, the clinician completed it at the time of their appointment and the form returned with the patient to RVH on the same day.We completed multiple Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles; before our project was curtailed by the COVID-19 pandemic. During our study period, seven patients attended the OPD with a form, with all seven returning to RVH with a completed treatment plan documented by the OPD clinician. This allowed rehabilitation teams to have access to clinic instructions generated by orthopaedic surgeons almost immediately after a patient attended the clinic, essentially eliminating the delay in information-sharing.The introduction of a simple communication tool and processes to ensure reliable transfer of information can expedite information-sharing between secondary care teams and can potentially reduce delays in rehabilitation.

Medical students as agents of change: a qualitative exploratory study.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that medical students have the potential to actively initiate, lead and bring about change through quality improvement within healthcare organisations. For effective change to occur, it is important that students are introduced to, and exposed to the value and necessity of quality improvement early in their careers. The aim of this study was to explore the perspectives and experiences of medical students and their mentors after undertaking quality improvement projects within the healthcare setting, and if such practice-based experiences were an effective way of building improvement capacity and changing practice. METHODS: A qualitative interpretive description methodology, using focus groups with medical students and semi-structured interviews with academic and clinical mentors following completion of students' 4-week quality improvement projects was adopted. RESULTS: The findings indicate that there are a range of facilitators and barriers to undertaking and completing quality improvement projects in the clinical setting, such as time-scales, differing perspectives, roles and responsibilities between students and multidisciplinary healthcare professionals. CONCLUSIONS: This study has demonstrated that quality improvement experiential learning can develop knowledge and skills among medical students and transform attitudes towards quality improvement. Furthermore, it can also have a positive impact on clinical staff and healthcare organisations. Despite inherent challenges, undertaking quality improvement projects in clinical practice enhances knowledge, understanding and skills, and allows medical students to see themselves as important influencers of change as future doctors.

Does a multidisciplinary approach have a beneficial effect on the development of a structured patient handover process between acute surgical wards in one of Scotland's largest teaching hospitals?

BACKGROUND: Effective handover is key in preventing harm.1 In the Acute Surgical Receiving Unit of Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, large numbers of patients are transferred daily. However, lack of medical handover during transfer means important tasks are missed. Our aim was to understand and reflect on the current system and test changes to improve medical handover. AIM: Our aim was to ensure that 95% of patients being transferred from the Acute Surgical Receiving Unit receive a basic medical handover within 2 months. METHODS: Initially, we collated issues that were missed when patients were transferred. These data coupled with questionnaire data from members of the team fed into the creation of a handover tool. We proposed to link our tool with the nursing handover, hence creating one unified handover tool. We completed six full Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles (two on communication to aide handover and four on the tool itself) to assess and develop our tool. RESULTS: By our final PDSA cycle, 84% (33/39) of the patients had a handover, meaning no tasks were missed during transfer. After 4 months, 9 out of 10 staff felt that the introduction of the handover sheet made the handover process smoother and 8 out of 10 felt that the handover sheet improved patient safety and quality of care. CONCLUSIONS: Improving handover can be challenging. However, we have shown that a relatively simple intervention can help promote better practice. Challenges are still present as uptake was only 84%, so work still has to be done to improve this. A wider cultural change involving communication and education would be required to implement this tool more widely.

Interprofessional, student-led intervention to improve insulin prescribing to patients in an Acute Surgical Receiving Unit.

Our aim was to test the feasibility of interprofessional, workplace-based learning about improvement through a 4-week placement for one medical and two pharmacy final year students in an Acute Surgical Receiving Unit (ASRU). The target was insulin because this is a common, high-risk medicine in this ASRU and the intervention was medicines reconciliation. Baseline data were collected from 10 patients and used to construct a cause and effect diagram and a process map through feedback and discussions with staff. Hypoglycaemia occurred in four patients but hyperglycaemia occurred in eight patients, of whom six were placed on intravenous insulin infusion (IVII). We estimated that £2454 could be saved by preventing one patient from going on IVII. The students designed and tested a sticker to improve medicines reconciliation for insulin patients. An online form was created to capture clinician feedback on the layout and usability of the sticker. The intervention was associated with improvements in the reliability of medicines reconciliation. The students' work contributed to a larger project to reduce the risk of hypoglycaemia in the ASRU. This proved beneficial in enabling the students to engage with the clinical team. Nonetheless, it was challenging for students from two Universities to get a shared understanding of improvement methods and work effectively with the clinical team. The students said that they learnt more about quality improvement in a working healthcare environment than they would ever learn in a classroom and they valued the opportunity to work with students from other healthcare backgrounds in practice. Despite the additional staff time required to support students from two Universities, both have supported continuation of this work.

Learning from errors: assessing final year medical students' reflection on safety improvement, five year cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Investigation of real incidents has been consistently identified by expert reviews and student surveys as a potentially valuable teaching resource for medical students. The aim of this study was to adapt a published method to measure resident doctors' reflection on quality improvement and evaluate this as an assessment tool for medical students. METHODS: The design is a cohort study. Medical students were prepared with a tutorial in team based learning format and an online Managing Incident Review course. The reliability of the modified Mayo Evaluation of Reflection on Improvement tool (mMERIT) was analysed with Generalizability G-theory. Long term sustainability of assessment of incident review with mMERIT was tested over five consecutive years. RESULTS: A total of 824 students have completed an incident review using 167 incidents from NHS Tayside's online reporting system. In order to address the academic practice gap students were supervised by Senior Charge Nurses or Consultants on the wards where the incidents had been reported. Inter-rater reliability was considered sufficiently high to have one assessor for each student report. There was no evidence of a gradient in student marks across the academic year. Marks were significantly higher for students who used Section Questions to structure their reports compared with those who did not. In Year 1 of the study 21 (14%) of 153 mMERIT reports were graded as concern. All 21 of these students achieved the required standard on resubmission. Rates of resubmission were lower (3% to 7%) in subsequent years. CONCLUSIONS: We have shown that mMERIT has high reliability with one rater. mMERIT can be used by students as part of a suite of feedback to help supplement their self-assessment on their learning needs and develop insightful practice to drive their development of quality, safety and person centred professional practice. Incident review addresses the need for workplace based learning and use of real life examples of mistakes, which has been identified by previous studies of education about patient safety in medical schools.

Care bundles for acute kidney injury: a balanced accounting of the impact of implementation in an acute medical unit.

In 2009, a National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death report detailed significant shortcomings in recognition and management of patients with acute kidney injury (AKI). As part of a national collaborative to reduce harm from AKI, the Scottish Patient Safety Programme developed two care bundles to improve response ('SHOUT') and review ('BUMP') of AKI. Baseline data from eight patients with AKI on the acute medical unit (AMU) in Ninewells Hospital showed 62% compliance with SHOUT. However, most patients were transferred from AMU within 24 hours so BUMP could not be assessed. Our aim was to achieve >95% compliance with SHOUT on AMU within 2 months. The content of the SHOUT bundle was condensed onto a sticker for the case notes, which was implemented using Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles. Compliance was assessed weekly and feedback obtained from stakeholders concerning their opinion of the sticker, SHOUT bundle and care bundles in general. Use of the sticker was 27% in week 1 but fell to 5% by week 4. Compliance with the bundle varied from 45% to 60% and was only slightly improved by use of the sticker (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.39 to 6.42). Staff found the sticker burdensome and did not agree that all elements of SHOUT were equally important. This opinion was supported by finding that their compliance with sepsis and hypovolaemia recommendations was 91%-100% throughout, whereas urinalysis was documented in only 55%-63% of patients. Several staff mentioned 'bundle fatigue' and on one day we identified 22 other care bundles or structured improvement forms in AMU. We concluded that the AMU staff had legitimate concerns about the SHOUT care bundle and that our intervention was demotivating. Overcoming bundle fatigue will not be a simple task. We plan to work with staff on integrating AKI into patient safety huddles and on using modelling and recognition of good practice to improve motivation.

Identifying key areas for active interprofessional learning partnerships: A facilitated dialogue.

Student and service user involvement is recognised as an important factor in creating interprofessional education (IPE) opportunities. We used a team-based learning approach to bring together undergraduate health professional students, early career professionals (ECPs), public partners, volunteers, and carers to explore learning partnerships. Influenced by evaluative inquiry, this qualitative study used a free text response to allow participants to give their own opinion. A total of 153 participants (50 public partners and 103 students and professionals representing 11 healthcare professions) took part. Participants were divided into mixed groups of six (n = 25) and asked to identify areas where students, professionals, and public could work together to improve health professional education. Each group documented their discussions by summarising agreed areas and next steps. Responses were collected and transcribed for inductive content analysis. Seven key themes (areas for joint working) were identified: communication, public as partners, standards of conduct, IPE, quality improvement, education, and learning environments. The team-based learning format enabled undergraduate and postgraduate health professionals to achieve consensus with public partners on areas for IPE and collaboration. Some of our results may be context-specific but the approach is generalisable to other areas.

All Patients with Diabetes Should Have Annual UACR Tests. Why is That So Hard?

The urine albumin creatinine ratio (UACR) detects abnormal levels of protein in the urine and should be performed annually to detect kidney disease in patients with diabetes mellitus. UK national audits show that 25% of patients do not have annual tests and our data suggested that some patients had more than one test per year. Data from 20 patients showed that 55% had more than one UACR test per year, with a total of 19 unnecessary tests at an estimated cost of £20,000 per year. However 20% had not had a UACR in the previous year, so unreliable testing was potentially causing harm as well as waste. Process mapping showed that having a UACR test depended on whether the patient brought a urine sample to the clinic. Most (72%) patients were unaware that the urine sample was used to detect kidney damage. We encountered barriers when finding a process to automate measures of reliability of UACR testing using computer protocol, and therefore created a patient information leaflet. The first version of the leaflet was too technical and several changes were suggested by patients. After reading the revised leaflet 99% of patients understood the reason for UACR testing and 64% felt more motivated to bring in urine samples. The phlebotomist disseminated the patient information leaflet with a median of 90% reliability for six consecutive clinics. The patient information leaflet has the potential to improve patient involvement in their care and to increase the number of patients who bring urine samples to the clinic. However, this could increase the number of unnecessary tests unless the process of test ordering is changed to ensure that UACR is only measured annually.

Referral Finder: Saving Time and Improving The Quality of In-hospital Referrals.

Making referrals to other hospital specialties is one of the key duties of the foundation doctor, which can be difficult and time consuming. In Ninewells hospital, Scotland, in our experience the effectiveness of referrals is limited by contact details not being readily accessible and foundation doctors not knowing what information is relevant to each specialty. We surveyed foundation doctors on their experience of the existing referral process to identify where we needed to focus to improve the process. The doctors reported significant delays in obtaining contact details from the operator, and found they did not know the specific information needed in each referral. To increase the information available to foundation doctors, we set up a page on the staff intranet called 'Referral Finder'. This page includes contact details, guidelines for referral, and links to relevant protocols for each specialty. By making this information readily accessible our objective was to increase the speed and quality of referrals. When surveyed two months after the web page was established, foundation doctors reported a reduction in calls to operator from baseline and reported achieving more effective referrals. When asked to comment, many doctors asked if the page could include details for other hospitals in our health board and provide more specialty specific information. This feedback prompted us to extend the scope of the page to include the district general hospital in our region, and update many of the existing details. Doctors were then surveyed after the updates, 100% agreed that the website saved time and there was a 49.3% reduction in doctors who reported not knowing the specific information needed for a referral. Having adequate information improved referrals and resulted in time saved. This would allow more time for patient care. The quality improvement project was praised among doctors as a useful, innovative and replicable project.

Introduction of a junior doctors' handbook: an essential guide for new doctors.

The transition period for new junior doctors is a daunting and challenging time, as vast amounts of information specific to each hospital, ward, and job must be learnt while maintaining patient care standards.[1] In NHS Tayside, Scotland, tips and guidance for each job are informally handed over from previous junior doctors to the next, resulting in an unreliable and unsustainable handover of information. Time must then be spent by new doctors learning the intricacies and practicalities of their new job, rather than spending time focusing on patient care. Our aim was to improve this transition period for new junior doctors to NHS Tayside through the creation and implementation of a junior doctors' handbook, which would provide information and practical advice on day to day life as a junior doctor. We hoped to implement this project by August 2015 to coincide with the arrival of these new doctors to NHS Tayside. Through repeat PDSA cycles we created a sustainable and reliable junior doctors' handbook, containing a centralised hub of information for doctors that was accessible through our health board's website. The junior doctors' handbook has been a highly beneficial resource that has been praised for its detailed information on all aspects of day to day life for doctors in NHS Tayside. Feedback also demonstrated that doctors felt the junior doctors' handbook had improved their efficiency. Our hope is that this project can continue to be developed within our hospital, but also to be used as an idea outside our health board to improve the transition period for new doctors on a wider scale.

Improving the inspection and manual cleaning of dental instruments in a dental hospital.

Within the dental hospital setting, it is a frequent occurrence to find residual cement contaminating instruments in a newly opened kit having undergone the decontamination cycle. Any instrument found to be contaminated then cannot be used, as the area underneath the cement is not sterile. This in itself has several repercussions. These include: cross-contamination, since there is a chance that the cement will be removed and the contaminated instrument used; cost, as each new kit that will be opened due to contaminated instruments will incur decontamination costs; and finally time, which most importantly has an impact on patient experience. Our baseline data recording focussed on finding out the severity of the problem, which instruments were most affected, and how this affected patient treatment, using a questionnaire. Within the paediatric department, 27% of examination kits contained a contaminated instrument, almost one third of all kits used. This quality improvement project utilized a poster and team huddle discussions to raise awareness of the problem and successfully reduced the number of contaminated instrument kits to 7% over a period of four weeks.

Development and Implementation of a Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infection (CAUTI) 'Toolkit'.

Indwelling urinary catheters are a commonly used invasive medical device within acute and non-acute settings in NHS Scotland. The second National Survey of the Prevalence of Hospital Acquired Infection (HAI) in Scotland 2011 identified that 19.2% of patients surveyed had an indwelling urinary catheter. In this survey, Urinary Tract Infections (UTI) were identified as the most prevalent type of HAI at 22.6% in acute settings and 39% in non-acute settings [1]. In September 2013 the Scottish Government released a Chief Executive Letter (CEL 19) which identified Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infection (CAUTI) as one of the nine Points of Care Priorities within the Scottish Patient Safety Programme, with the aim of reducing CAUTI by 30% by end of December 2015 measured against a national definition [2]. This quality improvement project saw the development, testing and introduction within NHS Tayside of an evidenced based bundle of care. This was to standardise and drive quality care delivery for the insertion and maintenance of urethral urinary catheters with the intention of reducing catheter associated urinary tract infections in our patients. Data collection tools and data reporting mechanisms were also developed, tested and introduced using a national CAUTI definition to capture data for improvement and local and national reporting of progress.

Improving multidisciplinary communication at ward board rounds using video enhanced reflective practice.

The priority to ensure patient safety and use resources effectively, demands attention and innovation. Video enhanced reflective practice (VERP) provides training based upon analysis of film clips of one's professional practice to develop practical insight into the processes of communication, so that effective changes can be made to ongoing behaviour and practice. In this case the focus was on multi-disciplinary communication within daily board rounds on an acute medicine and care of the elderly ward. Baseline assessment and post intervention testing of perceptions of change by both full and core team were undertaken to establish the impact of VERP training. In addition pre and post focus group discussion and film analysis supplemented evaluation. The findings support the view that after VERP training of a core team, board rounds were seen as consistently easier to participate in, providing improved focus, were more efficient in goal setting and resulting in better care for patients as well as improved pathways to discharge. This suggests benefits to the communication "culture" of a multidisciplinary team resulting in increased benefits for the wider team. It is concluded that the use of tailored VERP training for personal, professional and team development is relevant, feasible, and worthy of further testing and investigation.

Improving the recognition of post-operative acute kidney injury.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) state that acute kidney injury (AKI) is seen in 13-18% of all people being admitted to hospital and that other patients will further go on to develop AKI during their time in hospital, with around 30-40% being in the operative setting. AKI has an estimated inpatient mortality of 20-30% in the UK and can lead to long-term morbidities like chronic kidney disease.[2] AKI is under-recognised and badly managed despite its prevalence and seriousness, with NCEPOD report stating that only 50% of patients with AKI received good care, that there was poor assessment of risk factors for AKI, and there was an unacceptable delay in recognising post-admission AKI in 43% of patients.[4] Baseline data collected on the urology ward in Ninewells Hospital, showed that only five of 22 (23%) patients undergoing urological surgery had post-operative creatinine measured on the ward within 48 hours (the primary method for detecting AKI). Excluding patients who were discharged the same day 5/16 (31%) received the blood test. The aim of the project was to increase the number of patients returning to ward 9 post-surgery who receive a serum creatinine measurement within two days of their urological surgery, excluding daycases. Specifically, we wanted the reliability of this measurement to be 95% or over in ward 9 by 30 July 2014. This was to be done by raising awareness around AKI on ward 9 and changing protocol so that every patient staying on ward 9 beyond their day of surgery should receive a post-operative creatinine. This would be tested for a set amount of time to see if patients with AKI were being missed. Despite not being able to implement a set protocol, the percentage of patients receiving post-operative creatinine measurements on ward 9 after a urological surgery still increased significantly. By interacting with the urology team and presenting our data, the knowledge and comprehension of the problem was altered. This lead to a change in culture and a significant increase in the number of post-operative creatinine measurements being taken. Through building relationships on the ward and sharing our data and knowledge there was an increase from 27% of patients receiving post-op creatinine in our first week of collecting data, to 87% in our last week on ward 9. However, without a set tool or change in protocol this change appears to have not been sustainable as the percentage dropped to 42% two weeks later.

Partnership working between a higher education institution and NHS TRUSTS: developing an acute and critical care module.

The underpinning philosophy of preparing nurses to work within a modern National Health Service (NHS) is to ensure patient safety and quality of clinical care. There is increasing recognition that post-registration education should become more clinically focused and adopt a more work-based approach. Critical to the success of such an approach is partnership working between education providers and NHS Trusts. Changes in the delivery of acute care in the NHS have resulted in an increased number of highly dependent patients in both critical and non-critical care areas. This article describes a partnership approach between a Higher Education Institution (HEI) and two NHS Trusts to deliver a degree level module to address the subsequent educational implications of these changes. This approach ensured module credibility and clinical focus. Student feedback confirms the clinical relevance of the module. Staff from the NHS had the opportunity to develop teaching skills by preparing teaching materials, delivering teaching sessions and receiving feedback on these. Areas of good practice were identified and there was sharing of skills, knowledge and expertise between both institutions. Joint working can enhance clinical relevance of educational provision and ensure consistency between theory and practice. In addition, there were a number of wider benefits to both institutions that resulted from this initiative.