Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety最新文献

Background

Early detection of deterioration of hospitalized patients with timely intervention improves outcomes in the hospital. Patients, family members, and visitors (consumers) at the patient's bedside who are familiar with the patient's condition may play a critical role in detecting early patient deterioration. The authors sought to understand clinicians’ views on consumer reporting of patient deterioration through an established hospital consumer-initiated escalation-of-care system.

Methods

A convenience sample of new graduate-level to senior-level nurses and physicians from two hospitals in South Australia was administered a paper survey containing six open-ended questions. Data were analyzed with a matrix-style framework and six steps of thematic analysis.

Results

A total of 244 clinicians—198 nurses and 46 physicians—provided their views on the consumer-initiated escalation-of-care system. Six major themes and subthemes emerged from the responses indicating that (1) clinicians were supportive of consumer reporting and felt that consumers were ideally positioned to recognize deterioration early and raise concerns about it; (2) management support was required for consumer escalation processes to be effective; (3) clinicians’ workload could possibly increase or decrease from consumer escalation; (4) education of consumers and staff on escalation protocol is a requirement for success; (5) there is need to build consumer confidence to speak up; and (6) there is a need to address barriers to consumer escalation.

Conclusion

Clinicians were supportive of consumers acting as first reporters of patient deterioration. Use of interactive, encouraging communication skills with consumers was recognized as critical. Annual updating of clinicians on consumer reporting of deterioration was also recommended.

Background

The Joint Commission recently named reduction of health care disparities and improvement of health care equity as quality and safety priorities (Leadership [LD] Standard LD.04.03.08 and National Patient Safety Goal [NPSG] Standard NPSG.16.01.01). As the largest integrated health system, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) sought to leverage these new accreditation standards to further integrate and expand existing tools and initiatives to reduce health care disparities and address health-related social needs (HRSNs).

Initiatives and Tools

A combination of existing data tools (for example, Primary Care Equity Dashboard), resource tools (for example, Assessing Circumstances and Offering Resources for Needs tool), and a care delivery approach (for example, Whole Health) are discussed as quality improvement opportunities to further integrate and expand how VHA addresses health care disparities and HRSNs. The authors detail the development timeline, building, limitations, and future plans for these tools and initiatives.

Coordination of Initiatives

Responding to new health care equity Joint Commission standards led to new implementation strategies and deeper partnerships across VHA that facilitated expanded dissemination, technical assistance activities, and additional resources for VHA facilities to meet new standards and improve health care equity for veterans. Health care systems may learn from VHA's experiences, which include building actionable data platforms, employing user-centered design for initiative development and iteration, designing wide-reaching dissemination strategies for tools, and recognizing the importance of providing technical assistance for stakeholders.

Future Directions

VHA continues to expand implementation of a diverse set of tools and resources to reduce health care disparities and identify and address unmet individual veteran HRSNs more widely and effectively.

Background

This qualitative study aimed to understand how early adopting health care organizations (HCOs) implement the documentation of patients’ disability status and accommodation needs in the electronic health record (EHR).

Methods

The authors conducted qualitative interviews with HCOs that had active or past initiatives to implement systematic collection of disability status in the EHR. The interviews elicited participants’ current experiences, desired features of a standard EHR build, and challenges and successes. A team-based analysis approach was used to review and summarize quotations to identify themes and categorize text that exemplified identified themes.

Results

Themes identified from the interviews included “why” organizations collected disability status; of “what” their EHR build consisted, including who collected, how often data were collected, and what data were collected; and “how” organizations were implementing systematic collection. The main purpose for collection of disability status and accommodation needs was to prepare for patients with disabilities. Due to this priority, participants believed collection should (1) occur prior to patients’ clinical encounters, (2) be conducted regularly, (3) use standardized language, and (4) be available in a highly visible location in the EHR. Leadership support to integrate collection into existing workflows was essential for success.

Conclusion

Patients with disabilities experience significant disparities in the receipt of equitable health care services. To provide equitable care, HCOs need to systematically collect disability status and accommodation needs in the EHR to ensure that they are prepared to provide equitable care to all patients with disabilities.

Voluntary event reporting (VER) systems underestimate the incidence of safety events and often capture only serious events. A limited amount of data is collected through these systems, and they may be inadequate to characterize disparities in reported safety events. We conducted a scoping review of the literature to summarize the state of the evidence as it relates to differences in safety events and safety event reporting by age, gender, and race. Using a broad-based query, a systematic search for published, peer-reviewed literature that discusses patient safety event reporting and differences by age, gender, race, and socioeconomic status was conducted. Based on modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 283 studies underwent title and abstract review, yielding 56 studies for full text review. After full text review, 23 studies were carefully reviewed individually, grouped thematically, and summarized to highlight the most pertinent findings. The studies reviewed yielded important insights, particularly with regard to race, gender, and the ways events are identified. Patients from minoritized groups may be less likely to have events reported and more likely to suffer serious events. Some studies found differences in rates of reporting safety events for female vs. male providers. The rate of VER is consistently lower than the rate of events identified through identified using automated detection. The current literature describing VER data shows disparities by race, language, age, and gender for patients and providers. Further research and systematic change are needed to specifically study these disparities to guide health care institutions on ways to mitigate bias and deliver more equitable care.

Background

Disasters exacerbate health inequities, with historically marginalized populations experiencing unjust differences in health care access and outcomes. Health systems plan and respond to disasters using the Hospital Incident Command System (HICS), an organizational structure that centralizes communication and decision-making. The HICS does not have an equity role or considerations built into its standard structure. The authors conducted a narrative review to identify and summarize approaches to embedding equity into the HICS.

Methods

The peer-reviewed (PubMed, SCOPUS) and gray literature was searched for articles from high-income countries that referenced the HICS or Incident Command System (ICS) and equity, disparities, or populations that experience inequities in disasters. The primary focus of the search strategy was health care, but the research also included governmental and public health system articles. Two authors used inductive thematic analysis to assess commonalities and refined the themes based on feedback from all authors.

Results

The database search identified 479 unique abstracts; 76 articles underwent full-text review, and 11 were included in the final analysis. The authors found 5 articles through cited reference searching and 13 from the gray literature search, which included websites, organizations, and non-indexed journal articles. Three themes from the articles were identified: including equity specialists in the HICS, modifying systems to promote equity, and sensitivity to the local community.

Conclusion

Several efforts to embed equity into the HICS and disaster preparedness and response were discovered. This review provides practical strategies health system leaders can include in their HICS and emergency preparedness plans to promote equity in their disaster response.

Background

The collection of health-related social needs (HRSN) data at one large health system has historically been inconsistent. This project was aimed to increase annual HRSN screening rates by standardizing data collection in the electronic health record (EHR) through optimized clinical workflows.

Methods

The authors designed a standard screening questionnaire in alignment with the Accountable Health Communities model, and they conducted interviews with eleven US-based health systems and one medical center on best practices for ambulatory HRSN screening and interventions, which identified five possible methods to administer the questionnaire. After testing, the authors opted to send questionnaires to patients through the patient portal three days prior to an ambulatory visit. For inpatients, in-person interviews were implemented. Staff implementing the updated processes included registered nurses, social workers, preventive health coordinators, and community health workers.

Results

The annual screening rate for all active ambulatory patients increased from 0.4% to 15.9% (p < 0.001), and 10.7% of all patients had at least one health-related social need. The annual screening rate for inpatients was estimated to be zero at baseline and increased by 66 percentage points (p < 0.001). The most prevalent health-related social need in both settings was financial resource strain, followed closely by food insecurity.

Conclusion

Well-designed interventions and technology support were effective in achieving improved screening and data collection. Leadership support, building interventions within preexisting workflows, and ensuring standard data capture in the EHR were key factors leading to successful process improvement.

Background

Maternal mortality in the United States is high, and women and birthing people of color experience higher rates of mortality and severe maternal morbidity (SMM). More than half of maternal deaths and cases of SMM are considered preventable. The research presented here investigated systems issues contributing to adverse outcomes and racial/ethnic disparities in maternal care using patient safety incident reports.

Methods

The authors reviewed incidents reported in the labor and delivery unit (L&D) and the antepartum and postpartum unit (A&P) of a large academic hospital in 2019 and 2020. Deliveries associated with a reported incident were described by race/ethnicity, age group, method of delivery, and several other process variables. Differences across racial/ethnic group were statistically evaluated.

Results

Almost two thirds (64.8%) of the 528 reports analyzed were reported in L&D, and 35.2% were reported in A&P. Non-Hispanic white (NHW) patients accounted for 43.9% of reported incidents, non-Hispanic Black (NHB) patients accounted for 43.2%, Hispanic patients accounted for 8.9%, and patients categorized as “other” accounted for 4.0%. NHB patients were disproportionally represented in the incident reports, as they accounted for only 36.5% of the underlying birthing population. The odds ratio (OR) demonstrated a higher risk of a reported adverse incident for NHB patients; however, adjustment for cesarean section attenuated the association (OR 1.25, 95% confidence interval 1.01–1.54).

Conclusion

Greater integration of patient safety and health equity efforts in hospitals are needed to promptly identify and alleviate racial and ethnic disparities in maternal health outcomes. Although additional systems analysis is necessary, the authors offer recommendations to support safer, more equitable maternal care.