What can Safety Cases offer for patient safety? A multisite case study.

IF 5.6 1区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMJ Quality & Safety Pub Date : 2024-02-19 DOI:10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016042
Elisa Giulia Liberati, Graham P Martin, Guillaume Lamé, Justin Waring, Carolyn Tarrant, Janet Willars, Mary Dixon-Woods
{"title":"What can Safety Cases offer for patient safety? A multisite case study.","authors":"Elisa Giulia Liberati, Graham P Martin, Guillaume Lamé, Justin Waring, Carolyn Tarrant, Janet Willars, Mary Dixon-Woods","doi":"10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Safety Case is a regulatory technique that requires organisations to demonstrate to regulators that they have systematically identified hazards in their systems and reduced risks to being as low as reasonably practicable. It is used in several high-risk sectors, but only in a very limited way in healthcare. We examined the first documented attempt to apply the Safety Case methodology to clinical pathways.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data are drawn from a mixed-methods evaluation of the Safer Clinical Systems programme. The development of a Safety Case for a defined clinical pathway was a centrepiece of the programme. We base our analysis on 143 interviews covering all aspects of the programme and on analysis of 13 Safety Cases produced by clinical teams.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The principles behind a proactive, systematic approach to identifying and controlling risk that could be curated in a single document were broadly welcomed by participants, but was not straightforward to deliver. Compiling Safety Cases helped teams to identify safety hazards in clinical pathways, some of which had been previously occluded. However, the work of compiling Safety Cases was demanding of scarce skill and resource. Not all problems identified through proactive methods were tractable to the efforts of front-line staff. Some persistent hazards, originating from institutional and organisational vulnerabilities, appeared also to be out of the scope of control of even the board level of organisations. A particular dilemma for organisational senior leadership was whether to prioritise fixing the risks proactively identified in Safety Cases over other pressing issues, including those that had already resulted in harm.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Safety Case approach was recognised by those involved in the Safer Clinical Systems programme as having potential value. However, it is also fraught with challenge, highlighting the limitations of efforts to transfer safety management practices to healthcare from other sectors.</p>","PeriodicalId":9077,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Quality & Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10894827/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Quality & Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016042","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Safety Case is a regulatory technique that requires organisations to demonstrate to regulators that they have systematically identified hazards in their systems and reduced risks to being as low as reasonably practicable. It is used in several high-risk sectors, but only in a very limited way in healthcare. We examined the first documented attempt to apply the Safety Case methodology to clinical pathways.

Methods: Data are drawn from a mixed-methods evaluation of the Safer Clinical Systems programme. The development of a Safety Case for a defined clinical pathway was a centrepiece of the programme. We base our analysis on 143 interviews covering all aspects of the programme and on analysis of 13 Safety Cases produced by clinical teams.

Results: The principles behind a proactive, systematic approach to identifying and controlling risk that could be curated in a single document were broadly welcomed by participants, but was not straightforward to deliver. Compiling Safety Cases helped teams to identify safety hazards in clinical pathways, some of which had been previously occluded. However, the work of compiling Safety Cases was demanding of scarce skill and resource. Not all problems identified through proactive methods were tractable to the efforts of front-line staff. Some persistent hazards, originating from institutional and organisational vulnerabilities, appeared also to be out of the scope of control of even the board level of organisations. A particular dilemma for organisational senior leadership was whether to prioritise fixing the risks proactively identified in Safety Cases over other pressing issues, including those that had already resulted in harm.

Conclusions: The Safety Case approach was recognised by those involved in the Safer Clinical Systems programme as having potential value. However, it is also fraught with challenge, highlighting the limitations of efforts to transfer safety management practices to healthcare from other sectors.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
安全案例能为患者安全提供什么?多站点案例研究。
背景:安全案例是一种监管技术,要求组织向监管机构证明,他们已经系统地识别了系统中的危险,并将风险降低到合理可行的最低水平。它被用于几个高风险部门,但在医疗保健领域的使用方式非常有限。我们检查了第一次将安全案例方法应用于临床途径的尝试。方法:数据来源于安全临床系统项目的混合方法评估。为确定的临床途径开发安全案例是该计划的核心内容。我们的分析基于143次采访,涵盖了该计划的各个方面,并分析了临床团队制作的13个安全案例。结果:可以在一份文件中策划的主动、系统的风险识别和控制方法背后的原则受到与会者的广泛欢迎,但并不简单。编写安全案例有助于团队识别临床路径中的安全隐患,其中一些路径以前已经被阻断。然而,编写安全案例的工作需要稀缺的技能和资源。并非所有通过积极主动的方法发现的问题都能由一线工作人员处理。一些源于机构和组织脆弱性的持续危害似乎也超出了组织董事会层面的控制范围。组织高级领导层面临的一个特殊困境是,是否优先解决安全案例中主动发现的风险,而不是其他紧迫问题,包括那些已经造成伤害的问题。结论:安全案例方法被参与更安全临床系统计划的人员认为具有潜在价值。然而,它也充满了挑战,突出了将安全管理实践从其他部门转移到医疗保健的努力的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Quality & Safety
BMJ Quality & Safety HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
7.40%
发文量
104
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Quality & Safety (previously Quality & Safety in Health Care) is an international peer review publication providing research, opinions, debates and reviews for academics, clinicians and healthcare managers focused on the quality and safety of health care and the science of improvement. The journal receives approximately 1000 manuscripts a year and has an acceptance rate for original research of 12%. Time from submission to first decision averages 22 days and accepted articles are typically published online within 20 days. Its current impact factor is 3.281.
期刊最新文献
Development of the Patient-Reported Indicator Surveys (PaRIS) conceptual framework to monitor and improve the performance of primary care for people living with chronic conditions. Cluster randomised evaluation of a training intervention to increase the use of statistical process control charts for hospitals in England: making data count. Role of communicating diagnostic uncertainty in the safety-netting process: insights from a vignette study. Integration and connection: the key to effectiveness of large-scale pharmacist-led medication reviews? Reducing administrative burden by implementing a core set of quality indicators in the ICU: a multicentre longitudinal intervention study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1