Building a Program Theory of Implementation Using Process Evaluation of a Complex Quality Improvement Trial in Nursing Homes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Significant quality problems exist in long-term care (LTC). Interventions to improve care are complex and often have limited success. Implementation remains a black box. We developed a program theory explaining how implementation of a complex intervention occurs in LTC settings-examining mechanisms of impact, effects of context on implementation, and implementation outcomes such as fidelity. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Concurrent process evaluation of Safer Care for Older Persons in residential Environments (SCOPE)-a frontline worker (care aide) led improvement trial in 31 Canadian LTC homes. Using a mixed-methods exploratory sequential design, qualitative data were analyzed using grounded theory to develop a conceptual model illustrating how teams implemented the intervention and how it produced change. Quantitative analyses (mixed-effects regression) tested aspects of the program theory. RESULTS: Implementation fidelity was moderate. Implementation is facilitated by (a) care aide engagement with core intervention components; (b) supportive leadership (internal facilitation) to create positive team dynamics and help negotiate competing workplace priorities; (c) shifts in care aide role perceptions and power differentials. Mixed-effects model results suggest intervention acceptability, perceived intervention benefits, and leadership support predict implementation fidelity. When leadership support is high, fidelity is high regardless of intervention acceptability or perceived benefits. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Our program theory addresses important knowledge gaps regarding implementation of complex interventions in nursing homes. Results can guide scaling of complex interventions and future research.

Developing a tool to measure enactment of complex quality improvement interventions in healthcare.

Quality improvement (QI) projects are common in healthcare settings and often involve interdisciplinary teams working together towards a common goal. Many interventions and programmes have been introduced through research to convey QI skills and knowledge to healthcare workers, however, a few studies have attempted to differentiate between what individuals 'learn' or 'know' versus their capacity to apply their learnings in complex healthcare settings. Understanding and differentiating between delivery, receipt, and enactment of QI skills and knowledge is important because while enactment alone does not guarantee desired QI outcomes, it might be reasonably assumed that 'better enactment' is likely to lead to better outcomes. This paper describes the development, application and validation of a tool to measure enactment of core QI skills and knowledge of a complex QI intervention in a healthcare setting. Based on the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Model for Improvement, existing QI assessment tools, literature on enactment fidelity and our research protocols, 10 indicators related to core QI skills and knowledge were determined. Definitions and assessment criteria were tested and refined in five iterative cycles. Qualitative data from four QI teams in long-term care homes were used to test and validate the tool. The final measurement tool contains 10 QI indicators and a five-point scale. Inter-rater reliability ranged from good to excellent. Usability and acceptability among raters were considered high. This measurement tool assists in identifying strengths and weaknesses of a QI team and allows for targeted feedback on core QI components. The indicators developed in our tool and the approach to tool development may be useful in other health related contexts where similar data are collected.

Reporting unit context data to stakeholders in long-term care: a practical approach.

BACKGROUND: The importance of reporting research evidence to stakeholders in ways that balance complexity and usability is well-documented. However, guidance for how to accomplish this is less clear. We describe a method of developing and visualising dimension-specific scores for organisational context (context rank method). We explore perspectives of leaders in long-term care nursing homes (NHs) on two methods for reporting organisational context data: context rank method and our traditionally presented binary method-more/less favourable context. METHODS: We used a multimethod design. First, we used survey data from 4065 healthcare aides on 290 care units from 91 NHs to calculate quartiles for each of the 10 Alberta Context Tool (ACT) dimension scores, aggregated at the care unit level based on the overall sample distribution of these scores. This ordinal variable was then summed across ACT scores. Context rank scores were assessed for associations with outcomes for NH staff and for quality of care (healthcare aides' instrumental and conceptual research use, job satisfaction, rushed care, care left undone) using regression analyses. Second, we used a qualitative descriptive approach to elicit NH leaders' perspectives on whether the methods were understandable, meaningful, relevant, and useful. With 16 leaders, we conducted focus groups between December 2017 and June 2018: one in Nova Scotia, one in Prince Edward Island, and one in Ontario, Canada. Data were analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Composite scores generated using the context rank method had positive associations with healthcare aides' instrumental research use (p < .0067) and conceptual research use and job satisfaction (p < .0001). Associations were negative between context rank summary scores and rushed care and care left undone (p < .0001). Overall, leaders indicated that data presented by both methods had value. They liked the binary method as a starting point but appreciated the greater level of detail in the context rank method. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend careful selection of either the binary or context rank method based on purpose and audience. If a simple, high-level overview is the goal, the binary method has value. If improvement is the goal, the context rank method will give leaders more actionable details.

Sustained effects of the INFORM cluster randomized trial: an observational post-intervention study.

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have examined the efficacy and effectiveness of health services interventions. However, much less research is available on the sustainability of study outcomes. The purpose of this study was to assess the lasting benefits of INFORM (Improving Nursing Home Care Through Feedback On perfoRMance data) and associated factors 2.5 years after removal of study supports. INFORM was a complex, theory-based, three-arm, parallel cluster-randomized trial. In 2015-2016, we successfully implemented two theory-based feedback strategies (compared to a simple feedback approach) to increase nursing home (NH) care aides' involvement in formal communications about resident care. METHODS: Sustainability analyses included 51 Western Canadian NHs that had been randomly allocated to a simple and two assisted feedback interventions in INFORM. We measured care aide involvement in formal interactions (e.g., resident rounds, family conferences) and other study outcomes at baseline (T1, 09/2014-05/2015), post-intervention (T2, 01/2017-12/2017), and long-term follow-up (T3, 06/2019-03/2020). Using repeated measures, hierarchical mixed models, adjusted for care aide, care unit, and facility variables, we assess sustainability and associated factors: organizational context (leadership, culture, evaluation) and fidelity of the original INFORM intervention. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 18 NHs (46 units, 529 care aides) in simple feedback, 19 NHs (60 units, 731 care aides) in basic assisted feedback, and 14 homes (41 units, 537 care aides) in enhanced assisted feedback. T2 (post-intervention) scores remained stable at T3 in the two enhanced feedback arms, indicating sustainability. In the simple feedback group, where scores were had remained lower than in the enhanced groups during the intervention, T3 scores rose to the level of the two enhanced feedback groups. Better culture (ß = 0.099, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.005; 0.192), evaluation (ß = 0.273, 95% CI 0.196; 0.351), and fidelity enactment (ß = 0.290, 95% CI 0.196; 0.384) increased care aide involvement in formal interactions at T3. CONCLUSIONS: Theory-informed feedback provides long-lasting improvement in care aides' involvement in formal communications about resident care. Greater intervention intensity neither implies greater effectiveness nor sustainability. Modifiable context elements and fidelity enactment during the intervention period may facilitate sustained improvement, warranting further study-as does possible post-intervention spread of our intervention to simple feedback homes.

Fidelity is not easy! Challenges and guidelines for assessing fidelity in complex interventions.

BACKGROUND: Fidelity in complex behavioural interventions is underexplored and few comprehensive or detailed fidelity studies report on specific procedures for monitoring fidelity. Using Bellg's popular Treatment Fidelity model, this paper aims to increase understanding of how to practically and comprehensively assess fidelity in complex, group-level, interventions. APPROACH AND LESSONS LEARNED: Drawing on our experience using a mixed methods approach to assess fidelity in the INFORM study (Improving Nursing home care through Feedback On perfoRMance data-INFORM), we report on challenges and adaptations experienced with our fidelity assessment approach and lessons learned. Six fidelity assessment challenges were identified: (1) the need to develop succinct tools to measure fidelity given tools tend to be intervention specific, (2) determining which components of fidelity (delivery, receipt, enactment) to emphasize, (3) unit of analysis considerations in group-level interventions, (4) missing data problems, (5) how to respond to and treat fidelity 'failures' and 'deviations' and lack of an overall fidelity assessment scheme, and (6) ensuring fidelity assessment doesn't threaten internal validity. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: Six guidelines, primarily applicable to group-level studies of complex interventions, are described to help address conceptual, methodological, and practical challenges with fidelity assessment in pragmatic trials. The current study offers guidance to researchers regarding key practical, methodological, and conceptual challenges associated with assessing fidelity in pragmatic trials. Greater attention to fidelity assessment and publication of fidelity results through detailed studies such as this one is critical for improving the quality of fidelity studies and, ultimately, the utility of published trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02695836. Registered on February 24, 2016.

Examining fidelity in the INFORM trial: a complex team-based behavioral intervention.

BACKGROUND: Fidelity in complex behavioral interventions is underexplored. This study examines the fidelity of the INFORM trial and explores the relationship between fidelity, study arm, and the trial's primary outcome-care aide involvement in formal team communications about resident care. METHODS: A concurrent process evaluation of implementation fidelity was conducted in 33 nursing homes in Western Canada (Alberta and British Columbia). Study participants were from 106 clinical care units clustered in 33 nursing homes randomized to the Basic and Enhanced-Assisted Feedback arms of the INFORM trial. RESULTS: Fidelity of the INFORM intervention was moderate to high, with fidelity delivery and receipt higher than fidelity enactment for both study arms. Higher enactment teams experienced a significantly larger improvement in formal team communications between baseline and follow-up than lower enactment teams (F(1, 70) = 4.27, p = .042). CONCLUSIONS: Overall fidelity enactment was associated with improvements in formal team communications, but the study arm was not. This suggests that the intensity with which an intervention is offered and delivered may be less important than the intensity with which intervention participants enact the core components of an intervention. Greater attention to fidelity assessment and publication of fidelity results through studies such as this one is critical to improving the utility of published trials.

Comparing effects of two higher intensity feedback interventions with simple feedback on improving staff communication in nursing homes-the INFORM cluster-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective communication among interdisciplinary healthcare teams is essential for quality healthcare, especially in nursing homes (NHs). Care aides provide most direct care in NHs, yet are rarely included in formal communications about resident care (e.g., change of shift reports, family conferences). Audit and feedback is a potentially effective improvement intervention. This study compares the effect of simple and two higher intensity levels of feedback based on goal-setting theory on improving formal staff communication in NHs. METHODS: This pragmatic three-arm parallel cluster-randomized controlled trial included NHs participating in TREC (translating research in elder care) across the Canadian provinces of Alberta and British Columbia. Facilities with at least one care unit with 10 or more care aide responses on the TREC baseline survey were eligible. At baseline, 4641 care aides and 1693 nurses cared for 8766 residents in 67 eligible NHs. NHs were randomly allocated to a simple (control) group (22 homes, 60 care units) or one of two higher intensity feedback intervention groups (based on goal-setting theory): basic assisted feedback (22 homes, 69 care units) and enhanced assisted feedback 2 (23 homes, 72 care units). Our primary outcome was the amount of formal communication about resident care that involved care aides, measured by the Alberta Context Tool and presented as adjusted mean differences [95% confidence interval] between study arms at 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Baseline and follow-up data were available for 20 homes (57 care units, 751 care aides, 2428 residents) in the control group, 19 homes (61 care units, 836 care aides, 2387 residents) in the basic group, and 14 homes (45 care units, 615 care aides, 1584 residents) in the enhanced group. Compared to simple feedback, care aide involvement in formal communications at follow-up was 0.17 points higher in both the basic ([0.03; 0.32], p = 0.021) and enhanced groups ([0.01; 0.33], p = 0.035). We found no difference in this outcome between the two higher intensity groups. CONCLUSIONS: Theoretically informed feedback was superior to simple feedback in improving care aides' involvement in formal communications about resident care. This underlines that prior estimates for efficacy of audit and feedback may be constrained by the type of feedback intervention tested. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02695836 ), registered on March 1, 2016.

Importance of safety climate, teamwork climate and demographics: understanding nurses, allied health professionals and clerical staff perceptions of patient safety.

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence regarding the importance of contextual factors for patient/staff outcomes and the likelihood of successfully implementing safety improvement interventions such as checklists; however, certain literature gaps still remain-for example, lack of research examining the interactive effects of safety constructs on outcomes. This study has addressed some of these gaps, together with adding to our understanding of how context influences safety. PURPOSE: The impact of staff perceptions of safety climate (ie, senior and supervisory leadership support for safety) and teamwork climate on a self-reported safety outcome (ie, overall perceptions of patient safety (PS)) were examined at a hospital in Southern Ontario. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey data were collected from nurses, allied health professionals and unit clerks working on intensive care, general medicine, mental health or emergency department. RESULTS: Hierarchical regression analyses showed that perceptions of senior leadership (p<0.001) and teamwork (p<0.001) were significantly associated with overall perceptions of PS. A non-significant association was found between perceptions of supervisory leadership and the outcome variable. However, when staff perceived poorer senior leadership support for safety, the positive effect of supervisory leadership on overall perceptions of PS became significantly stronger (p<0.05). PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our results suggest that leadership support at one level (ie, supervisory) can substitute for the absence of leadership support for safety at another level (ie, senior level). While healthcare organisations should recruit into leadership roles and retain individuals who prioritise safety and possess adequate relational competencies, the field would now benefit from evidence regarding how to build leadership support for PS. Also, it is important to provide on-site workshops on topics (eg, conflict management) that can strengthen working relationships across professional and unit boundaries.

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.

Improving Nursing Home Care through Feedback On PerfoRMance Data (INFORM): Protocol for a cluster-randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback is effective in improving the quality of care. However, methods and results of international studies are heterogeneous, and studies have been criticized for a lack of systematic use of theory. In TREC (Translating Research in Elder Care), a longitudinal health services research program, we collect comprehensive data from care providers and residents in Canadian nursing homes to improve quality of care and life of residents, and quality of worklife of caregivers. The study aims are to a) systematically feed back TREC research data to nursing home care units, and b) compare the effectiveness of three different theory-based feedback strategies in improving performance within care units. METHODS: INFORM (Improving Nursing Home Care through Feedback On PerfoRMance Data) is a 3.5-year pragmatic, three-arm, parallel, cluster-randomized trial. We will randomize 67 Western Canadian nursing homes with 203 care units to the three study arms, a standard feedback strategy and two assisted and goal-directed feedback strategies. Interventions will target care unit managerial teams. They are based on theory and evidence related to audit and feedback, goal setting, complex adaptive systems, and empirical work on feeding back research results. The primary outcome is the increased number of formal interactions (e.g., resident rounds or family conferences) involving care aides - non-registered caregivers providing up to 80% of direct care. Secondary outcomes are a) other modifiable features of care unit context (improved feedback, social capital, slack time) b) care aides' quality of worklife (improved psychological empowerment, job satisfaction), c) more use of best practices, and d) resident outcomes based on the Resident Assessment Instrument - Minimum Data Set 2.0. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, immediately after the 12-month intervention period, and 18 months post intervention. DISCUSSION: INFORM is the first study to systematically assess the effectiveness of different strategies to feed back research data to nursing home care units in order to improve their performance. Results of this study will enable development of a practical, sustainable, effective, and cost-effective feedback strategy for routine use by managers, policy makers and researchers. The results may also be generalizable to care settings other than nursing homes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02695836 . Date of registration: 24 February 2016.

Understanding nurses' and physicians' fear of repercussions for reporting errors: clinician characteristics, organization demographics, or leadership factors?

BACKGROUND: Identifying and understanding factors influencing fear of repercussions for reporting and discussing medical errors in nurses and physicians remains an important area of inquiry. Work is needed to disentangle the role of clinician characteristics from those of the organization-level and unit-level safety environments in which these clinicians work and learn, as well as probing the differing reporting behaviours of nurses and physicians. This study examines the influence of clinician demographics (age, gender, and tenure), organization demographics (teaching status, location of care, and province) and leadership factors (organization and unit leadership support for safety) on fear of repercussions, and does so for nurses and physicians separately. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of 2319 nurse and 386 physician responders from three Canadian provinces to the Modified Stanford patient safety climate survey (MSI-06). Data were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis, multiple linear regression, and hierarchical linear regression. RESULTS: Age, gender, tenure, teaching status, and province were not significantly associated with fear of repercussions for nurses or physicians. Mental health nurses had poorer fear responses than their peers outside of these areas, as did community physicians. Strong organization and unit leadership support for safety explained the most variance in fear for both nurses and physicians. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of associations between several plausible factors including age, tenure and teaching status suggests that fear is a complex construct requiring more study. Substantially differing fear responses across locations of care indicate areas where interventions may be needed. In addition, since factors affecting fear of repercussions appear to be different for nurses and physicians, tailoring patient safety initiatives to each group may, in some instances, be fruitful. Although further investigation is needed to examine these and other factors in detail, supportive safety leadership appears to be central to reducing fear of reporting errors for both nurses and physicians.

Development and testing of an objective structured clinical exam (OSCE) to assess socio-cultural dimensions of patient safety competency.

BACKGROUND: Patient safety (PS) receives limited attention in health professional curricula. We developed and pilot tested four Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) stations intended to reflect socio-cultural dimensions in the Canadian Patient Safety Institute's Safety Competency Framework. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 18 third year undergraduate medical and nursing students at a Canadian University. METHODS: OSCE cases were developed by faculty with clinical and PS expertise with assistance from expert facilitators from the Medical Council of Canada. Stations reflect domains in the Safety Competency Framework (ie, managing safety risks, culture of safety, communication). Stations were assessed by two clinical faculty members. Inter-rater reliability was examined using weighted κ values. Additional aspects of reliability and OSCE performance are reported. RESULTS: Assessors exhibited excellent agreement (weighted κ scores ranged from 0.74 to 0.82 for the four OSCE stations). Learners' scores varied across the four stations. Nursing students scored significantly lower (p<0.05) than medical students on three stations (nursing student mean scores=1.9, 1.9 and 2.7; medical student mean scores=2.8, 2.9 and 3.5 for stations 1, 2 and 3, respectively where 1=borderline unsatisfactory, 2=borderline satisfactory and 3=competence demonstrated). 7/18 students (39%) scored below 'borderline satisfactory' on one or more stations. CONCLUSIONS: Results show (1) four OSCE stations evaluating socio-cultural dimensions of PS achieved variation in scores and (2) performance on this OSCE can be evaluated with high reliability, suggesting a single assessor per station would be sufficient. Differences between nursing and medical student performance are interesting; however, it is unclear what factors explain these differences.

'Not another safety culture survey': using the Canadian patient safety climate survey (Can-PSCS) to measure provider perceptions of PSC across health settings.

BACKGROUND: The importance of a strong safety culture for enhancing patient safety has been stated for over a decade in healthcare. However, this complex construct continues to face definitional and measurement challenges. Continuing improvements in the measurement of this construct are necessary for enhancing the utility of patient safety climate surveys (PSCS) in research and in practice. This study examines the revised Canadian PSCS (Can-PSCS) for use across a range of care settings. METHODS: Confirmatory factor analytical approaches are used to extensively test the Can-PSCS. Initial and cross-validation samples include 13 126 and 6324 direct care providers from 119 and 35 health settings across Canada, respectively. RESULTS: Results support a parsimonious model of direct care provider perceptions of patient safety climate (PSC) with 19 items in six dimensions: (1) organisational leadership support for safety; (2) incident follow-up; (3) supervisory leadership for safety; (4) unit learning culture; (5) enabling open communication I: judgement-free environment; (6) enabling open communication II: job repercussions of error. Results also support the validity of the Can-PSCS across a range of care settings. CONCLUSIONS: The Can-PSCS has several advantages: (1) it is a theory-based instrument with a small number of actionable dimensions central to the construct of PSC; (2) it has robust psychometric properties; (3) it is validated for use across a range of care settings, therefore suitable for use in regionalised health delivery systems and can help to raise expectations about acceptable levels of PSC across the system; (4) it has been tested in a publicly funded universal health insurance system and may be suitable for similar international systems.

Self-reported patient safety competence among new graduates in medicine, nursing and pharmacy.

BACKGROUND: As efforts to address patient safety (PS) in health professional (HP) education increase, it is important to understand new HPs' perspectives on their own PS competence at entry to practice. This study examines the self-reported PS competence of newly registered nurses, pharmacists and physicians. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of 4496 new graduates in medicine (1779), nursing (2196) and pharmacy (521) using the HP Education in PS Survey (H-PEPSS). The H-PEPSS measures HPs' self-reported PS competence on six socio-cultural dimensions of PS, including culture, teamwork, communication, managing risk, responding to risk and understanding human factors. The H-PEPSS asks about confidence in PS learning in classroom and clinical settings. RESULTS: All HP groups reported feeling more confident in the dimension of PS learning related to effective communication with patients and other providers. Greater confidence in PS learning was reported for learning experiences in the clinical setting compared with the class setting with one exception-nurses' confidence in learning about working in teams with other HPs deteriorated as they moved from thinking about learning in the classroom setting to thinking about learning in the clinical setting. CONCLUSIONS: Large-scale efforts are required to more deeply and consistently embed PS learning into HP education. However, efforts to embed PS learning in HP education seem to be hampered by deficiencies that persist in the culture of the clinical training environments in which we educate and acculturate new HPs.

Staff, space, and time as dimensions of organizational slack: a psychometric assessment.

BACKGROUND: : In the theoretical and research literature, organizational slack has been largely described in terms of financial resources and its impact on organizational outcomes. However, empirical research is limited by unclear definitions and lack of standardized measures. PURPOSE: : The aim of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of a new organizational slack measure in health care settings. METHODS: : A total of 752 nurses and 197 allied health care professionals (AHCPs) employed in seven pediatric Canadian hospitals completed the Alberta Context Tool, an instrument measuring organizational context, which includes the newly developed organizational slack measure. The nine-item, 5-point Likert organizational slack measure includes items assessing staff perceptions of available human resources (staffing), time, and space. We report psychometric assessments, bivariate analyses, and data aggregation indices for the measure. FINDINGS: : The findings indicate that the measure has three subscales (staff, space, and time) with acceptable internal consistency reliability (alphas for staff, space, and time, respectively:.83,.63, and.74 for nurses;.81,.52, and.76 for AHCPs), links theory and hypotheses (construct validity), and is related to other relevant variables. Within-group reliability measures indicate stronger agreement among nurses than AHCPs, more reliable aggregation results in all three subscales at the unit versus facility level, and higher explained variance and validity of aggregated scores at the unit level. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: : The proposed organizational slack measure assesses modifiable organizational factors in hospitals and has the potential to explain variance in important health care system outcomes. Further assessments of the psychometric properties of the organizational slack measure in acute and long-term care facilities are underway.

The relationship between organizational leadership for safety and learning from patient safety events.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between organizational leadership for patient safety and five types of learning from patient safety events (PSEs). STUDY SETTING: Forty-nine general acute care hospitals in Ontario, Canada. STUDY DESIGN: A nonexperimental design using cross-sectional surveys of hospital patient safety officers (PSOs) and patient care managers (PCMs). PSOs provided data on organization-level learning from (a) minor events, (b) moderate events, (c) major near misses, (d) major event analysis, and (e) major event dissemination/communication. PCMs provided data on organizational leadership (formal and informal) for patient safety. EXTRACTION METHODS: Hospitals were the unit of analysis. Seemingly unrelated regression was used to examine the influence of formal and informal leadership for safety on the five types of learning from PSEs. The interaction between leadership and hospital size was also examined. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Formal organizational leadership for patient safety is an important predictor of learning from minor, moderate, and major near-miss events, and major event dissemination. This relationship is significantly stronger for small hospitals (<100 beds). CONCLUSIONS: We find support for the relationship between patient safety leadership and patient safety behaviors such as learning from safety events. Formal leadership support for safety is of particular importance in small organizations where the economic burden of safety programs is disproportionately large and formal leadership is closer to the front lines.

Development of a measure of patient safety event learning responses.

OBJECTIVE: To define patient safety event (PSE) learning response and to provide preliminary validation of a measure of PSE learning response. DATA SOURCES: Ten focus groups with front-line staff and managers, an expert panel, and cross-sectional survey data from patient safety officers in 54 general acute hospitals. STUDY DESIGN: A mixed methods study to define a measure of learning responses to patient safety failures that is rooted in theory, expert knowledge, and organizational practice realities. EXTRACTION METHODS: Learning response items developed from the literature were modified and validated in front-line staff and manager focus groups and by an expert panel and second group of external experts. Actual learning responses gleaned from survey data were examined using exploratory factor analyses and reliability analysis. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Unique learning response items were identified for minor, moderate, major events, and major near misses by an expert panel. A two-factor model of major event learning response was identified (factor 1=event analysis, factor 2=dissemination/communication of learnings). Organizations engage in greater learning responses following major events than less severe events and, for major events, organizations engage in more factor 1 responses than factor 2 learning responses. CONCLUSIONS: Eleven to 13 items can measure learning responses to PSEs of differing severity. The items are feasible, grounded in theory, and reflect expert opinion as well as practice setting realities. The items have the potential for use to assess current practice in organizations and set future improvement goals.

Categorizing errors and adverse events for learning: a provider perspective.

There is little agreement in the literature as to what types of patient safety events (PSEs) should be the focus for learning, change and improvement, and we lack clear and universally accepted definitions of error. In particular, the way front-line providers or managers understand and categorize different types of errors, adverse events and near misses and the kinds of events this audience believes to be valuable for learning are not well understood. Focus groups of front-line providers, managers and patient safety officers were used to explore how people in healthcare organizations understand and categorize different types of PSEs in the context of bringing about learning from such events. A typology of PSEs was developed from the focus group data and then mailed, along with a short questionnaire, to focus group participants for member checking and validation. Four themes emerged from our data: (1) incidence study categories are problematic for those working in organizations; (2) preventable events should be the focus for learning; (3) near misses are an important but complex category, differentiated based on harm potential and proximity to patients; (4) staff disagree on whether events causing severe harm or events with harm potential are most valuable for learning. A typology of PSEs based on these themes and checked by focus group participants indicates that staff and their managers divide events into simple categories of minor and major events, which are differentiated based on harm or harm potential. Confusion surrounding patient safety terminology detracts from the abilities of providers to talk about and reflect on a range of PSEs, and from opportunities to enhance learning, reduce event reoccurrence and improve patient safety at the point of care.

Revisiting interaction in knowledge translation.

BACKGROUND: Although the study of research utilization is not new, there has been increased emphasis on the topic over the recent past. Science push models that are researcher driven and controlled and demand pull models emphasizing users/decision-maker interests have largely been abandoned in favour of more interactive models that emphasize linkages between researchers and decisionmakers. However, despite these and other theoretical and empirical advances in the area of research utilization, there remains a fundamental gap between the generation of research findings and the application of those findings in practice. METHODS: Using a case approach, the current study looks at the impact of one particular interaction approach to research translation used by a Canadian funding agency. RESULTS: Results suggest there may be certain conditions under which different levels of decisionmaker involvement in research will be more or less effective. Four attributes are illuminated by the current case study: stakeholder diversity, addressability/actionability of results, finality of study design and methodology, and politicization of results. Future research could test whether these or other variables can be used to specify some of the conditions under which different approaches to interaction in knowledge translation are likely to facilitate research utilization. CONCLUSION: This work suggests that the efficacy of interaction approaches to research translation may be more limited than current theory proposes and underscores the need for more completely specified models of research utilization that can help address the slow pace of change in this area.