Hive Orientation and Colony Strength Affect Honey Bee Colony Activity during Almond Pollination.

The foraging activity of honey bees used to pollinate almonds was examined in relation to their hive entrance orientation and colony strength. Twenty-four colonies of honey bees, twelve in each group, were situated with their entrances facing east and west cardinal points. Bee out counts were recorded continuously and hive weight data at ∼10 min intervals from 17 February to 15 March 2023. Colony strength was assessed using the frames of adult bees (FOB) metric. East-facing hives started flight 44.2 min earlier than west-facing hives. The hive direction did not affect the timing of the cessation of foraging activity. The hive strength played a significant role: hives assessed as weak (≤3.0 FOB) commenced foraging activity 45 min later than strong hives (>3.0 FOB) and ceased foraging activity 38.3 min earlier. Hive weight data did not detect effects of either the hive direction or colony strength on the commencement and cessation of foraging activity, as determined using piecewise regression on 24 h datasets. However, the hive weight loss due to foraging activity at the start of foraging activity was significantly affected by both direction (East > West) and colony strength (Strong > Weak). Our study showed that, during almond pollination, both hive entrance exposure and hive strength have quantifiable effects on colony foraging behaviour and that these effects combine to regulate the overall foraging activity of the pollinating colonies.

Incidence, nature and causes of avoidable significant harm in primary care in England: retrospective case note review.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence of avoidable significant harm in primary care in England; describe and classify the associated patient safety incidents and generate suggestions to mitigate risks of ameliorable factors contributing to the incidents. DESIGN: Retrospective case note review. Patients with significant health problems were identified and clinical judgements were made on avoidability and severity of harm. Factors contributing to avoidable harm were identified and recorded. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Thirteen general practitioners (GPs) undertook a retrospective case note review of a sample of 14 407 primary care patients registered with 12 randomly selected general practices from three regions in England (total list size: 92 255 patients). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The incidence of significant harm considered at least 'probably avoidable' and the nature of the safety incidents. RESULTS: The rate of significant harm considered at least probably avoidable was 35.6 (95% CI 23.3 to 48.0) per 100 000 patient-years (57.9, 95% CI 42.2 to 73.7, per 100 000 based on a sensitivity analysis). Overall, 74 cases of avoidable harm were detected, involving 72 patients. Three types of incident accounted for more than 90% of the problems: problems with diagnosis accounted for 45/74 (60.8%) primary incidents, followed by medication-related problems (n=19, 25.7%) and delayed referrals (n=8, 10.8%). In 59 (79.7%) cases, the significant harm could have been identified sooner (n=48) or prevented (n=11) if the GP had taken actions aligned with evidence-based guidelines. CONCLUSION: There is likely to be a substantial burden of avoidable significant harm attributable to primary care in England with diagnostic error accounting for most harms. Based on the contributory factors we found, improvements could be made through more effective implementation of existing information technology, enhanced team coordination and communication, and greater personal and informational continuity of care.

Extraction, Enrichment, and LC-MSn-Based Characterization of Phlorotannins and Related Phenolics from the Brown Seaweed, Ascophyllum nodosum.

Phenolic components from the edible brown seaweed, Ascophyllum nodosum, have been associated with considerable antioxidant activity but also bioactivities related to human health. This study aims to select and identify the main phlorotannin components from this seaweed which have been previously associated with potential health benefits. Methods to enrich phenolic components then further select phlorotannin components from ethanolic extracts of Ascophyllum nodosum were applied. The composition and phenolic diversity of these extracts were defined using data dependent liquid chromatography mass spectroscopic (LC-MSn) techniques. A series of phlorotannin oligomers with apparent degree of polymerization (DP) from 10 to 31 were enriched by solid phase extraction and could be selected by fractionation on Sephadex LH-20. Evidence was also obtained for the presence of dibenzodioxin linked phlorotannins as well as sulphated phlorotannins and phenolic acids. As well as diversity in molecular size, there was evidence for potential isomers at each DP. MS2 fragmentation analyses strongly suggested that the phlorotannins contained ether linked phloroglucinol units and were most likely fucophlorethols and MS3 data suggested that the isomers may result from branching within the chain. Therefore, application of these LC-MSn techniques provided further information on the structural diversity of the phlorotannins from Ascophyllum, which could be correlated against their reported bioactivities and could be further applied to phlorotannins from different seaweed species.

Health and social care-associated harm amongst vulnerable children in primary care: mixed methods analysis of national safety reports.

PURPOSE: Patient safety failures are recognised as a global threat to public health, yet remain a leading cause of death internationally. Vulnerable children are inversely more in need of high-quality primary health and social-care but little is known about the quality of care received. Using national patient safety data, this study aimed to characterise primary care-related safety incidents among vulnerable children. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional mixed methods study of a national database of patient safety incident reports occurring in primary care settings. Free-text incident reports were coded to describe incident types, contributory factors, harm severity and incident outcomes. Subsequent thematic analyses of a purposive sample of reports was undertaken to understand factors underpinning problem areas. RESULTS: Of 1183 reports identified, 572 (48%) described harm to vulnerable children. Sociodemographic analysis showed that included children had child protection-related (517, 44%); social (353, 30%); psychological (189, 16%) or physical (124, 11%) vulnerabilities. Priority safety issues included: poor recognition of needs and subsequent provision of adequate care; insufficient provider access to accurate information about vulnerable children, and delayed referrals between providers. CONCLUSION: This is the first national study using incident report data to explore unsafe care amongst vulnerable children. Several system failures affecting vulnerable children are highlighted, many of which pose internationally recognised challenges to providers aiming to deliver safe care to this at-risk cohort. We encourage healthcare organisations globally to build on our findings and explore the safety and reliability of their healthcare systems, in order to sustainably mitigate harm to vulnerable children.

Automated classification of primary care patient safety incident report content and severity using supervised machine learning (ML) approaches.

Learning from patient safety incident reports is a vital part of improving healthcare. However, the volume of reports and their largely free-text nature poses a major analytic challenge. The objective of this study was to test the capability of autonomous classifying of free text within patient safety incident reports to determine incident type and the severity of harm outcome. Primary care patient safety incident reports (n=31333) previously expert-categorised by clinicians (training data) were processed using J48, SVM and Naïve Bayes.The SVM classifier was the highest scoring classifier for incident type (AUROC, 0.891) and severity of harm (AUROC, 0.708). Incident reports containing deaths were most easily classified, correctly identifying 72.82% of reports. In conclusion, supervised ML can be used to classify patient safety incident report categories. The severity classifier, whilst not accurate enough to replace manual processing, could provide a valuable screening tool for this critical aspect of patient safety.

Identifying 'avoidable harm' in family practice: a RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method consensus study.

BACKGROUND: Health care-related harm is an internationally recognized threat to public health. The United Kingdom's national health services demonstrate that upwards of 90% of health care encounters can be delivered in ambulatory settings. Other countries are transitioning to more family practice-based health care systems, and efforts to understand avoidable harm in these settings is needed. METHODS: We developed 100 scenarios reflecting a range of diseases and informed by the World Health Organization definition of 'significant harm'. Scenarios included different types of patient safety incidents occurring by commission and omission, demonstrated variation in timeliness of intervention, and conditions where evidence-based guidelines are available or absent. We conducted a two-round RAND / UCLA Appropriateness Method consensus study with a panel of family practitioners in England to define "avoidable harm" within family practice. Panelists rated their perceptions of avoidability for each scenario. We ran a k-means cluster analysis of avoidability ratings. RESULTS: Panelists reached consensus for 95 out of 100 scenarios. The panel agreed avoidable harm occurs when a patient safety incident could have been probably, or totally, avoided by the timely intervention of a health care professional in family practice (e.g. investigations, treatment) and / or an administrative process (e.g. referrals, alerts in electronic health records, procedures for following up results) in accordance with accepted evidence-based practice and clinical governance. Fifty-four scenarios were deemed avoidable, whilst 31 scenarios were rated unavoidable and reflected outcomes deemed inevitable regardless of family practice intervention. Scenarios with low avoidability ratings (1 s or 2 s) were not represented by the categories that were used to generate scenarios, whereas scenarios with high avoidability ratings (7 s 8 s or 9 s) were represented by these a priori categories. DISCUSSION: The findings from this RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method study define the characteristics and conditions that can be used to standardize measurement of outcomes for primary care patient safety. CONCLUSION: We have developed a definition of avoidable harm that has potential for researchers and practitioners to apply across primary care settings, and bolster international efforts to design interventions to target avoidable patient safety incidents that cause the most significant harm to patients.

Sources of unsafe primary care for older adults: a mixed-methods analysis of patient safety incident reports.

Background: older adults are frequent users of primary healthcare services, but are at increased risk of healthcare-related harm in this setting. Objectives: to describe the factors associated with actual or potential harm to patients aged 65 years and older, treated in primary care, to identify action to produce safer care. Design and Setting: a cross-sectional mixed-methods analysis of a national (England and Wales) database of patient safety incident reports from 2005 to 2013. Subjects: 1,591 primary care patient safety incident reports regarding patients aged 65 years and older. Methods: we developed a classification system for the analysis of patient safety incident reports to describe: the incident and preceding chain of incidents; other contributory factors; and patient harm outcome. We combined findings from exploratory descriptive and thematic analyses to identify key sources of unsafe care. Results: the main sources of unsafe care in our weighted sample were due to: medication-related incidents e.g. prescribing, dispensing and administering (n = 486, 31%; 15% serious patient harm); communication-related incidents e.g. incomplete or non-transfer of information across care boundaries (n = 390, 25%; 12% serious patient harm); and clinical decision-making incidents which led to the most serious patient harm outcomes (n = 203, 13%; 41% serious patient harm). Conclusion: priority areas for further research to determine the burden and preventability of unsafe primary care for older adults, include: the timely electronic tools for prescribing, dispensing and administering medication in the community; electronic transfer of information between healthcare settings; and, better clinical decision-making support and guidance.

Understanding the epidemiology of avoidable significant harm in primary care: protocol for a retrospective cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Most patient safety research has focused on specialist-care settings where there is an appreciation of the frequency and causes of medical errors, and the resulting burden of adverse events. There have, however, been few large-scale robust studies that have investigated the extent and severity of avoidable harm in primary care. To address this, we will conduct a 12-month retrospective cross-sectional study involving case note review of primary care patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct electronic searches of general practice (GP) clinical computer systems to identify patients with avoidable significant harm. Up to 16 general practices from 3 areas of England (East Midlands, London and the North West) will be recruited based on practice size, to obtain a sample of around 100 000 patients. Our investigations will include an 'enhanced sample' of patients with the highest risk of avoidable significant harm. We will estimate the incidence of avoidable significant harm and express this as 'per 100 000 patients per year'. Univariate and multivariate analysis will be conducted to identify the factors associated with avoidable significant harm. ETHICS/DISSEMINATION: The decision regarding participation by general practices in the study is entirely voluntary; the consent to participate may be withdrawn at any time. We will not seek individual patient consent for the retrospective case note review, but if patients respond to publicity about the project and say they do not wish their records to be included, we will follow these instructions. We will produce a report for the Department of Health's Policy Research Programme and several high-quality peer-reviewed publications in scientific journals. The study has been granted a favourable opinion by the East Midlands Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee (reference 15/EM/0411) and Confidentiality Advisory Group approval for access to medical records without consent under section 251 of the NHS Act 2006 (reference 15/CAG/0182).

Improving the safety of vaccine delivery.

Vaccines save millions of lives per annum as an integral part of community primary care provision worldwide. Adverse events due to the vaccine delivery process outnumber those arising from the pharmacological properties of the vaccines themselves. Whilst one in three patients receiving a vaccine will encounter some form of error, little is known about their underlying causes and how to mitigate them in practice. Patient safety incident reporting systems and adverse drug event surveillance offer a rich opportunity for understanding the underlying causes of those errors. Reducing harm relies on the identification and implementation of changes to improve vaccine safety at multiple levels: from patient interventions through to organizational actions at local, national and international levels. Here we highlight the potential for maximizing learning from patient safety incident reports to improve the quality and safety of vaccine delivery.

A cross-sectional mixed methods study protocol to generate learning from patient safety incidents reported from general practice.

INTRODUCTION: Incident reports contain descriptions of errors and harms that occurred during clinical care delivery. Few observational studies have characterised incidents from general practice, and none of these have been from the England and Wales National Reporting and Learning System. This study aims to describe incidents reported from a general practice care setting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A general practice patient safety incident classification will be developed to characterise patient safety incidents. A weighted-random sample of 12,500 incidents describing no harm, low harm and moderate harm of patients, and all incidents describing severe harm and death of patients will be classified. Insights from exploratory descriptive statistics and thematic analysis will be combined to identify priority areas for future interventions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The need for ethical approval was waivered by the Aneurin Bevan University Health Board research risk review committee given the anonymised nature of data (ABHB R&D Ref number: SA/410/13). The authors will submit the results of the study to relevant journals and undertake national and international oral presentations to researchers, clinicians and policymakers.

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

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

Pediatric immunization-related safety incidents in primary care: A mixed methods analysis of a national database.

BACKGROUND: Children are scheduled to receive 18-20 immunizations before their 18th birthday in England and Wales; this approximates to 13 million vaccines administered per annum. Each immunization represents a potential opportunity for immunization-related error and effective immunization is imperative to maintain the public health benefit from immunization. Using data from a national reporting system, this study aimed to characterize pediatric immunization-related safety incident reports from primary care in England and Wales between 2002 and 2013. METHODS: A cross-sectional mixed methods study was undertaken. This comprised reading the free-text of incident reports and applying codes to describe incident type, potential contributory factors, harm severity, and incident outcomes. A subsequent thematic analysis was undertaken to interpret the most commonly occurring codes, such as those describing the incident, events leading up to it and reported contributory factors, within the contexts they were described. RESULTS: We identified 1745 reports and most (n=1077, 61.7%) described harm outcomes including three deaths, 67 reports of moderate harm and 1007 reports of low harm. Failure of timely vaccination was the potential cause of three child deaths from meningitis and pneumonia, and described in a further 113 reports. Vaccine administration incidents included the wrong number of doses (n=476, 27.3%), wrong timing (n=294, 16.8%), and wrong vaccine (n=249, 14.3%). Documentation failures were frequently implicated. Socially and medically vulnerable children were commonly described. CONCLUSION: This is the largest examination of reported contributory factors for immunization-related patient safety incidents in children. Our findings suggest investments in IT infrastructure to support data linkage and identification of risk predictors, development of consultation models that promote the role of parents in mitigating safety incidents, and improvement efforts to adapt and adopt best practices from elsewhere, are needed to mitigate future immunization-related patient safety incidents. These priorities are particularly pressing for vulnerable patient groups.

Factors affecting visual acuity after one year of follow up after repeated intravitreal ranibizumab for macular degeneration.

AIM: Providing intravitreal ranibizumab therapy for neovascular age related macular degeneration (nARMD) is a source of increasing strain for many UK eye departments. Whilst most units attempt to adhere to the product licence of following up patients at four weekly intervals; delays in follow up appointments can and do occur. We aim to see if mean follow up intervals during the maintenance phase are correlated with visual outcomes at one year and perform a multivariate analysis of patient factors in a bit to understand the factors affecting visual acuity outcomes. METHOD: A continuously updated prospective audit of patients receiving ranibizumab therapy at the Royal Gwent Hospital was accessed and a coefficient of determination and Spearman's rank test undertaken to see whether mean follow up delays resulted in visual acuity penalties after nine months of maintenance. Multivariate analysis using ANOVA was then undertaken to examine in more detail the various factors affecting visual acuity outcomes. RESULTS: 805 eyes of 708 patients were included in the study. Mean follow up intervals varied between 28.0 and 96.3 days over the first six treatments of the maintenance phase (mean 49.2 - SD 10.7) with a mean change in visual acuity from baseline of +7.1 letters at 12 weeks and +4.6 letters at 52 weeks. There was a negative correlation seen between visual acuity gains after nine months of the maintenance phase and increasing clinic follow up times although Spearman's rank analysis demonstrated a correlation coefficient of only -0.078, which was not statistically significant. Variability in follow up appointments resulting in worse outcomes was however significant (p < 0.01), as was increasing age at presentation (p = 0.04). Smoking was found to decrease age of presentation by six years (74.2 years vs 80.0 years). The adjusted R (2) for the whole analysis was 0.44. CONCLUSION: Wide variation in follow up intervals was associated with a worse visual acuity outcome although longer mean follow up interval was not. Smokers presented at a significantly younger age than non-smokers or ex-smokers. This was a large study with an adjusted R (2) of 0.44. The results are relevant to other macular degeneration service providers around the world.