International Journal for Quality in Health Care最新文献

Biopharmaceuticals are complex biological molecules that require careful storage and handling to ensure medication integrity. In this study, a work system analysis of real-world protein drug (PD) handling was performed with the following goals: identify main barriers and facilitators for successful adherence to accepted recommendations in PD handling, analyse differences in two organizations, and define a Best Current Practice in the real-life handling of PDs based on the results of the work system analysis. Observational study was held in two university hospitals in Spain and Sweden. Based on the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model, the tools chosen were: the PETT scan, in order to indicate the presence of barriers or facilitators for the PETT components (People, Environment, Tools, Tasks); the Tasks and tools matrices to construct a checklist to record direct observations during the real-life handling of biopharmaceuticals, and the Journey map to depict the work process. Observations were performed between March and November 2022. Each episode of direct observation included a single protein drug in some point of the supply chain and considered all the elements in the work system. Based on the results of the work system analysis and the literature review, the authors propose a list of items which could be assumed as Best Current Practice for PDs handling in hospitals. There were a total of 34 observations involving 19 PDs. Regarding People involved in the work process, there was a diversity of professionals with different previous training and knowledge, leading to an information gap. With respect to Environment, some structural and organizational differences between hospitals lead to risks related to the time exposure of PDs to room temperature and mechanical stress. Some differences also existed in the Tools and Tasks involved in the process, being especially relevant to the lack of compatibility information of PDs with new technologies, such as pneumatic tube system, robotic reconstitution, or closed-system transfer devices. Finally, 15 suggestions for best current practice are proposed. Main barriers found for compliance with accepted recommendations were related to the information gap detected in professionals involved in the handling of protein drugs, unmonitored temperature, and the lack of compatibility information of protein drugs with some new technologies. By applying a Human Factors and Systems Engineering Approach, the comparison of two European hospitals has led to a suggested list of Best Current Practices in the handling of protein drugs in a hospital.

Patients can experience medication-related harm and hospital readmission because they do not understand or adhere to post-hospital medication instructions. Increasing patient medication literacy and, in turn, participation in medication conversations could be a solution. The purposes of this study were to co-design and test an intervention to enhance patient participation in hospital discharge medication communication. In terms of methods, co-design, a collaborative approach where stakeholders design solutions to problems, was used to develop a prototype medication communication intervention. First, our consumer and healthcare professional stakeholders generated intervention ideas. Next, inpatients, opinion leaders, and academic researchers collaborated to determine the most pertinent and feasible intervention ideas. Finally, the prototype intervention was shown to six intended end-users (i.e. hospital patients) who underwent usability interviews and completed the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability questionnaire. The final intervention comprised of a suite of three websites: (i) a medication search engine; (ii) resources to help patients manage their medications once home; and (iii) a question builder tool. The intervention has been tested with intended end-users and results of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability questionnaire have shown that the intervention is acceptable. Identified usability issues have been addressed. In conclusion, this co-designed intervention provides patients with trustworthy resources that can help them to understand medication information and ask medication-related questions, thus promoting medication literacy and patient participation. In turn, this intervention could enhance patients' medication self-efficacy and healthcare utilization. Using a co-design approach ensured authentic consumer and other stakeholder engagement, while allowing opinion leaders and researchers to ensure that a feasible intervention was developed.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a primary cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. VTE risk assessment is a crucial part of the VTE prevention guideline. However, VTE risk assessment was not consistently undertaken for admitted patients. The aim of this study was to identify whether a quality improvement project implemented to change documentation of VTE risk assessment for hospitalized patients impacted patient safety by decreasing the rate of VTE incidences. The study was set in a 600+ bed acute hospital that provides medical and surgical services for adult patients during the period October 2018-September 2020. The hospital adopted the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) 9th edition VTE prevention guidelines and followed the Modified Caprini risk assessment tool. Following the FOCUS-Plan-Do-Check-Act (FOCUS PDCA) improvement methodology, the improvement team implemented multicomponent interventions over a 3-month period, including conducting educational sessions, sharing VTE documentation compliance results, giving reminders during rounds, assigning a VTE liaison physician within each clinical specialty, and updating and communicating the hospital adopted VTE guidelines. A total of 17 612 patients were included, respectively, 8971 in pre-intervention and 8641 post-intervention period. Documentation of VTE risk assessment upon admission increased significantly in the post quality improvement intervention period (60% vs. 42%, relative increase of 30%, χ2 = 1.43, P < 0.001). The run chart trend analysis demonstrated significant improvement shift and improvement trend after quality improvement project implementation, and it was sustained for 15 months. There was no impact on patient safety with a slight not statistically significant decrease in the VTE incidences rate post intervention period (0.4% vs. 0.5%, relative decrease of 1%, χ2 = 0.82, P < 0.397). The quality improvement project intervention significantly increased the percentage of patients assessed for VTE risk in a hospital setting.

Allied health primary contact clinic models of care have increasingly been used as a strategy to increase public health service capacity. A recent systematic review found little consistency or agreement on how primary contact clinics are evaluated. The concept of value of primary contact clinics, which has important implications for evaluation, has not yet been explored in-depth. To explore allied health clinicians' perceptions of the value of allied health primary contact clinics, with the goal of informing an evaluation framework, a descriptive qualitative approach utilizing semi-structured interviews was employed. Participants included allied health staff embedded in clinical lead roles within primary contact clinics across four acute care hospitals in a metropolitan health service located in South-East Queensland, Australia. Lead staff from 30 identified primary contact clinic models in the health service were approached to take part via email. All eligible participants who provided consent were included. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used. A total of 23 clinicians (n = 23) representing 22 diverse models of primary contact clinics participated. Most participants were physiotherapists, dietitians, or occupational therapists, although speech pathology, audiology, and podiatry were also represented. Participant perceptions of the 'value' of PCCs were a highly complex phenomenon, comprising five intersecting domains: (i) patient satisfaction; (ii) clinical outcomes; (iii) care pathway and resource use; (iv) health service performance; and (v) staff satisfaction and professional standing. These five core value domains were positively or negatively influenced by 12 perceived benefits and 8 perceived drawbacks, respectively. Value domains were also highly interrelated and impacted upon each other. The concept of 'value' relating to primary contact clinics involves multiple intersecting domains encompassing different perspectives. This study highlighted potential benefits and drawbacks of primary contact clinics that have not yet been measured or explored in the literature, and as such may be useful for healthcare administrators to consider. The findings of this study will inform an evaluation framework including health economics calculator for primary contact clinics.

Several health policy institutes recommend reducing the number of indicators monitored by hospitals to better focus on indicators most relevant to local contexts. To determine which indicators are the most appropriate to eliminate, one must understand how indicator selection processes are undertaken. This study classifies hospital indicator selection processes and analyzes how they align with practices outlined in the 5-P Indicator Selection Process Framework. This qualitative, multiple case study examined indicator selection processes used by four large acute care hospitals in Ontario, Canada. Data were collected through 13 semistructured interviews and document analysis. A thematic analysis compared processes to the 5-P Indicator Selection Process Framework. Two types of hospital indicator selection processes were identified. Hospitals deployed most elements found within the 5-P Indicator Selection Process Framework including setting clear aims, having governance structures, considering indicators required by health agencies, and categorizing indicators into strategic themes. Framework elements largely absent included: adopting evidence-based selection criteria; incorporating finance and human resources indicators; considering if indicators measure structures, processes, or outcomes; and engaging a broader set of end users in the selection process. Hospitals have difficulty in balancing how to monitor government-mandated indicators with indicators more relevant to local operations. Hospitals often do not involve frontline managers in indicator selection processes. Not engaging frontline managers in selecting indicators may risk hospitals only choosing government-mandated indicators that are not reflective of frontline operations or valued by those managers accountable for improving unit-level performance.

Primary healthcare facilities are the bedrock for achieving universal health coverage (UHC) because of their closeness to the grassroots and provision of healthcare at low cost. Unfortunately, in Nigeria, the access and quality of health services in public primary healthcare centres (PHCs) are suboptimal, linked with persistent occurrence of absenteeism of health workers. We used a UHC framework developed by the World Health Organization-African Region to examine the link between absenteeism and the possible achievement of UHC in Nigeria. We undertook a qualitative study to elicit lived experiences of healthcare providers, service users, chairpersons of committees of the health facilities, and policymakers across six PHCs from six local government areas in Enugu, southeast Nigeria. One hundred and fifty participants sourced from the four groups were either interviewed or participated in group discussions. The World Health Organization-African Region UHC framework and phenomenological approach were used to frame data analysis. Absenteeism was very prevalent in the PHCs, where it constrained the possible contribution of PHCs to the achievement of UHC. The four indicators toward achievement of UHC, which are demand, access, quality, and resilience of health services, were all grossly affected by absenteeism. Absenteeism also weakened public trust in PHCs, resulting in an increase in patronage of both informal and private health providers, with negative effects on quality and cost of care. It is important that great attention is paid to both availability and productivity of human resources for health at the PHC level. These factors would help in reversing the dangers of absenteeism in primary healthcare and strengthening Nigeria's aspirations of achieving UHC.

Goal planning is an important element in brief health interventions provided in primary healthcare settings, with specific, measurable, achievable, realistic/relevant, and timed (SMART) goals recommended as best practice. This study examined the use of SMART goals by Australian community pharmacists providing a brief goal-oriented wellbeing intervention with service-users experiencing severe and persistent mental illnesses (SPMIs), in particular, which aspects of SMART goal planning were incorporated into the documented goals. Goal data from the PharMIbridge Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) were used to investigate how community pharmacists operationalized SMART goals, goal quality, and which SMART goal planning format aspects were most utilized. Goals were evaluated using the SMART Goal Evaluation Method (SMART-GEM) tool to determine how closely each documented goal met the SMART criteria. Goals were also categorized into five domains describing their content or purpose. Descriptive analysis was used to describe the SMART-GEM evaluation results, and the Kruskal-Wallis H test was used to compare the evaluation results across the goal domains. All goals (n = 512) co-designed with service-users (n = 156) were classified as poor quality when assessed against the SMART guidelines for goal statements, although most goals contained information regarding a specific behaviour and/or action (71.3% and 86.3%, respectively). Less than 25% of goals identified how goal achievement would be measured, with those related to lifestyle and wellbeing behaviours most likely to include measurement information. Additionally, the majority (93.5%) of goals lacked details regarding monitoring goal progress. Study findings raise questions regarding the applicability of the SMART goal format in brief health interventions provided in primary healthcare settings, particularly for service-users experiencing SPMIs. Further research is recommended to identify which elements of SMART goals are most relevant for brief interventions. Additionally, further investigation is needed regarding the impact of SMART goal training or support tools on goal quality.

Guidelines for cardiac catheterization in patients with non-specific chest pain (NSCP) provide significant room for provider discretion, which has resulted in variability in the utilization of invasive coronary angiograms (CAs) and a high rate of normal angiograms. The overutilization of CAs in patients with NSCP and discharged without a diagnosis of coronary artery disease is an important issue in medical care quality. As a result, we sought to identify patient demographic, socioeconomic, and geographic factors that influenced the performance of a CA in patients with NSCP who were discharged without a diagnosis of coronary artery disease. We intended to establish reference data points for gauging the success of new initiatives for the evaluation of this patient population. In this 20-year retrospective cohort study (1994-2014), we examined 107 796 patients with NSCP from the Myocardial Infarction Data Acquisition System, a large statewide validated database that contains discharge data for all patients with cardiovascular disease admitted to every non-federal hospital in NJ. Patients were partitioned into two groups: those offered a CA (CA group; n = 12 541) and those that were not (No-CA group; n = 95 255). Geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic variables were compared between the two groups using multivariable logistic regression, which determined the predictive value of each categorical variable on the odds of receiving a CA. Whites were more likely than Blacks and other racial counterparts (19.7% vs. 5.6% and 16.5%, respectively; P < .001) to receive a CA. Geographically, patients who received a CA were more likely admitted to a large hospital compared to small- or medium-sized ones (12.5% vs. 8.9% and 9.7%, respectively; P < .05), a primary teaching institution rather than a teaching affiliate or community center (16.1 % vs. 14.3% and 9.1%, respectively; P < .001), and at a non-rural facility compared to a rural one (12.1% vs. 6.5%; P < .001). Lastly from a socioeconomic standpoint, patients with commercial insurance more often received a CA compared to those having Medicare or Medicaid/self-pay (13.7% vs. 9.5% and 6.0%, respectively; P < .001). The utilization of CA in patients with NSCP discharged without a diagnosis of coronary artery disease in NJ during the study period may be explained by differences in geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic factors. Patients with NSCP should be well scrutinized for CA eligibility, and reliable strategies are needed to reduce discretionary medical decisions and improve quality of care.