Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety最新文献

Background

Increasing community care (CC) use by veterans has introduced new challenges in providing integrated care across the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and CC. VHA's well-recognized patient safety program has been particularly challenging for CC staff to adopt and implement. To standardize VHA safety practices across both settings, VHA implemented the Patient Safety Guidebook in 2018. The authors compared national- and facility-level trends in VHA and CC safety event reporting post-Guidebook implementation.

Methods

In this retrospective study using patient safety event data from VHA's event reporting system (2020–2022), the research team examined trends in patient safety events, adverse events, close calls (near misses), and recovery rates (ratio of close calls to adverse events plus close calls) in VHA and CC using linear regression models to determine whether the average changes in VHA and CC safety events at the national and facility levels per quarter were significant.

Results

A total of 499,332 safety events were reported in VHA and CC. Although VHA patient safety event trends were not significant (p > 0.05), there was a significant negative trend for adverse events (p = 0.02) and positive trends for close calls (p = 0.003) and recovery rates (p = 0.004). In CC there were significant negative trends for patient safety events and adverse events (p = 0.02) and a significant positive trend for recovery rates (p = 0.03). There was less variation in VHA than in CC facilities with significant decreases (for example, interquartile ranges in VHA and CC were 0.03 vs. 0.05, respectively).

Conclusion

Fluctuations in different safety events over time were likely due to the disruption of care caused by COVID-19 as well as organizational factors. Notably, the increases in recovery rates reflect less staff focus on harmful events and more attention to close calls (preventable events). Although safety practice adoption from VHA to CC was feasible, additional implementation strategies are needed to sustain standardized safety reporting across settings.

Background

Rates of aggressive events and workplace violence (WPV) exposure are often represented by proxy measures (restraint, incident, injury reports) in health care settings. Precise measurement of nurse and patient care assistant exposure rates to patient aggression on inpatient medical units in acute care hospitals advances knowledge, promoting WPV prevention and intervention.

Methods

This prospective, multisite cohort study examined the incidence of patient and visitor aggressive events toward patient care staff on five inpatient medical units in a community hospital and an academic hospital setting in the northeastern United States. Data were collected with event counters, Aggressive Incident and Management Logs (AIM-Logs), and demographic forms over a 14-day period in early 2017.

Results

Participants recorded a total of 179 aggressive events using event counters, resulting in a rate of 2.54 aggressive events per 20 patient-days. Patient verbal aggression rates (2.00 events per 20 patient-days) were higher compared to physical aggression rates (0.85 events per 20 patient-days). The staff aggression exposure rate was 1.17 events per 40 hours worked (verbal aggression exposure rate: 0.92 events per 40 hours; physical aggression exposure rate: 0.39 events per 40 hours). The most common precipitants included medication administration (18.6%), waiting for care (17.2%), and delivering food/drinks (15.9%). Most events were managed with verbal de-escalation (75.2%). The number of patients assigned to patient care staff was significantly greater during a shift when an aggressive event occurred compared to when no event occurred (6.3 vs. 5.7, t = -2.12, df = 201.6, p = 0.0348).

Conclusion

Event counters and AIM-Logs offer greater information about patterns of aggression and preventive interventions used and provide information on the need for debriefing and worker support after aggressive events. Additional studies of this methodology in other settings are needed to evaluate the value of this technology for improving worker and patient safety.

Background

Tracheostomies are associated with high rates of complications and preventable harm. Safe tracheostomy management requires highly functioning teams and systems, but health care providers are poorly equipped with tracheostomy knowledge and resources. In situ simulation has been used as a quality improvement tool to audit multidisciplinary team emergency response in the actual clinical environment where care is delivered but has been underexplored for tracheostomy care.

Methods

From July 2021 to May 2022, the study team conducted in situ simulations of a tracheostomy emergency scenario at Montefiore Medical Center to identify human errors and latent safety threats (LSTs). Simulations included structured debriefs as well as audiovisual recording that allowed for blind rating of these human errors and LSTs. Provider knowledge deficits were further characterized using pre-simulation quizzes.

Results

Twelve human errors and 15 LSTs were identified over 20 simulations with 88 participants overall. LSTs were divided into the following categories: communication, equipment, and infection control. Only 50.0% of teams successfully replaced the tracheostomy tube within the scenario's five-minute time limit. In addition, knowledge gaps were highly prevalent, with a median pre-simulation quiz score of 46% (interquartile range 36–64) among participants.

Conclusion

An in situ simulation-based quality improvement approach shed light on human errors and LSTs associated with tracheostomy care across multiple settings in one health system. This method of engaging frontline health care provider key stakeholders will inform the development, adaptation, and implementation of interventions.

Background

Technology can improve care delivery, patient outcomes, and staff satisfaction, but integration into the clinical workflow remains challenging. To contribute to this knowledge area, this study examined the implementation continuum of a contact-free, continuous monitoring system (CFCM) in an inpatient setting. CFCM monitors vital signs and uses the information to alert clinicians of important changes, enabling early detection of patient deterioration.

Methods

Data were collected throughout the entire implementation continuum at a community teaching hospital. Throughout the study, 3 group and 24 individual interviews and five process observations were conducted. Postimplementation alarm response data were collected. Analysis was conducted using triangulation of information sources and two-coder consensus.

Results

Preimplementation perceived barriers were alarm fatigue, questions about accuracy and trust, impact on patient experience, and challenges to the status quo. Stakeholders identified the value of CFCM as preventing deterioration and benefitting patients who are not good candidates for telemetry. Educational materials addressed each barrier and emphasized the shared CFCM values. Mean alarm response times were below the desired target of two minutes. Postimplementation interview analysis themes revealed lessened concerns of alarm fatigue and improved trust in CFCM than anticipated. Postimplementation challenges included insufficient training for secondary users and impact on patient experience.

Conclusion

In addition to understanding the preimplementation anticipated barriers to implementation and establishing shared value before implementation, future recommendations include studying strategies for optimal tailoring of education to each user group, identifying and reinforcing positive process changes after implementation, and including patient experience as the overarching element in frameworks for digital tool implementation.

Background

Patients who receive hemodialysis are at higher risk of developing health care–associated infections due to multiple factors, including direct and recurrent access to the bloodstream. Therefore, an effective infection prevention program should be in place to decrease the likelihood of these infections. Failure to assess gaps in systems and processes impedes the implementation of quality and performance improvement initiatives.

Methods

A multidisciplinary team created an infection prevention dialysis evaluation program by using Six Sigma's Define-Measure-Analyze-Design-Verify model. These elements included content within the dialysis-specific Infection Control Assessment and Response Tool from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention with supporting program assessment items. From August 2021 through August 2022, the team completed 17 inpatient dialysis assessments within the cohort's 17 facilities (long-term and acute care hospitals). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistical analysis, and the final analysis included 1,086 observations from the developed assessment tool.

Results

Deficiencies were grouped into seven major infection prevention categories among the 17 assessments, with the highest number of deficiencies seen within the categories of cleaning and disinfection (100%), hand hygiene (52.9%), and personal protective equipment (PPE) use (52.9%).

Conclusion

Our program was successful at detecting gaps in dialysis-based infection prevention. By conducting data analysis of assessment findings, we can assist organizations in establishing priorities for quality and performance improvement.

Background

Professional distress and burnout are increasingly common among health professionals. This trend prompted stakeholders at a large multicenter health care system to survey supervisors for improvement opportunities. The stakeholders learned that workplace leaders lacked tools and direction for appropriately responding to distressed employees. The authors implemented a supervisor training video on providing resources to improve employee mental health.

Methods

Using the DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control) methodology, the authors conducted key stakeholder interviews to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. Next, an e-mail survey was administered to a representative sample of supervisors that asked about degree of confidence in responding appropriately to distressed employees, with the response options “very confident,” “somewhat confident,” and “not at all confident.” After identifying factors contributing to low supervisor confidence, the research team developed and disseminated a six-minute, on-demand video to train supervisors to respond appropriately to employees during a mental health crisis. The same group of supervisors were surveyed using the same survey after exposure to the video, and responses were collected from those who had viewed the video but had not answered the preintervention survey.

Results

The proportion of supervisors who responded “not at all confident” in the survey decreased from 7.1% (15/210) of responses to 0.8% (1/123), while the proportion of supervisors who chose “somewhat confident” increased significantly, from 62.9% (132/210) to 69.1% (85/123) (p = 0.03). Of the 28 supervisors who had not participated in the presurvey and viewed the video, none indicated that they were “not at all confident.” The percentage of supervisors who felt distress “sometimes” or more frequently from navigating and supporting employee emotional concerns decreased nonsignificantly from 41.9% (88/210) to 37.4% (46/123) (p = 0.87).

Conclusion

Simple, on-demand supervisor training videos can improve the confidence of supervisors to respond appropriately to distressed employees, which may indirectly contribute to improved employee mental health.

Teamwork, communication, and workload issues continue to contribute to patient safety events. The authors developed a diagnostic mixed methods toolkit combining a behavior observation tool, semistructured interview guide, and surveys to proactively identify relevant gaps. Applied across 14 units at three hospitals, this toolkit yielded 344 findings with 156 associated recommendations and took, on average, four days of observation. On a scale from 1 (not at all helpful) to 6 (substantially helpful), leaders indicated that the assessment and its recommendations were very helpful (median 5, interquartile range 5–6, 34 survey respondents, 47.9% individual-level response rate, 85.7% unit-level response rate). Integrating this tool into a broader safety strategy can help inform organizational improvement efforts.