-
International Journal of Nursing Studies Nov 2017Early warning scores are widely used to identify deteriorating patients. Whilst their ability to predict clinical outcomes has been extensively reviewed, there has been... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Early warning scores are widely used to identify deteriorating patients. Whilst their ability to predict clinical outcomes has been extensively reviewed, there has been no attempt to summarise the overall strengths and limitations of these scores for patients, staff and systems. This review aims to address this gap in the literature to guide improvements for the optimization of patient safety.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted of MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library in September 2016. The citations and reference lists of selected studies were reviewed for completeness. Studies were included if they evaluated vital signs monitoring in adult human subjects. Studies regarding the paediatric population were excluded, as were studies describing the development or validation of monitoring models. A narrative synthesis of qualitative, quantitative and mixed- methods studies was undertaken.
FINDINGS
232 studies met the inclusion criteria. Twelve themes were identified from synthesis of the data: Strengths of early warning scores included their prediction value, influence on clinical outcomes, cross-specialty application, international relevance, interaction with other variables, impact on communication and opportunity for automation. Limitations included their sensitivity, the need for practitioner engagement, the need for reaction to escalation and the need for clinical judgment, and the intermittent nature of recording. Early warning scores are known to have good predictive value for patient deterioration and have been shown to improve patient outcomes across a variety of specialties and international settings. This is partly due to their facilitation of communication between healthcare workers. There is evidence that the prediction value of generic early warning scores suffers in comparison to specialty-specific scores, and that their sensitivity can be improved by the addition of other variables. They are also prone to inaccurate recording and user error, which can be partly overcome by automation.
CONCLUSIONS
Early warning scores provide the right language and environment for the timely escalation of patient care. They are limited by their intermittent and user-dependent nature, which can be partially overcome by automation and new continuous monitoring technologies, although clinical judgment remains paramount.
Topics: Humans; Narration; Patient Safety; Vital Signs
PubMed: 28950188
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.09.003 -
Journal of Biomedical Informatics Sep 2022Patient safety classifications/ontologies enable patient safety information systems to receive and analyze patient safety data to improve patient safety. Patient safety... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Patient safety classifications/ontologies enable patient safety information systems to receive and analyze patient safety data to improve patient safety. Patient safety classifications/ontologies have been developed and evaluated using a variety of methods. The purpose of this review was to discuss and analyze the methodologies for developing and evaluating patient safety classifications/ontologies.
METHODS
Studies that developed or evaluated patient safety classifications, terminologies, taxonomies, or ontologies were searched through Google Scholar, Google search engines, National Center for Biomedical Ontology (NCBO) BioPortal, Open Biological and Biomedical Ontology (OBO) Foundry and World Health Organization (WHO) websites and Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Science Direct. We updated our search on 30 February 2021 and included all studies published until the end of 2020. Studies that developed or evaluated classifications only for patient safety and provided information on how they were developed or evaluated were included. Systems with covered patient safety terms (such as ICD-10) but are not specifically developed for patient safety were excluded. The quality and the risk of bias of studies were not assessed because all methodologies and criteria were intended to be covered. In addition, we analyzed the data through descriptive narrative synthesis and compared and classified the development and evaluation methods and evaluation criteria according to available development and evaluation approaches for biomedical ontologies.
RESULTS
We identified 84 articles that met all of the inclusion criteria, resulting in 70 classifications/ontologies, nine of which were for the general medical domain. The most papers were published in 2010 and 2011, with 8 and 7 papers, respectively. The United States (50) and Australia (23) have the most studies. The most commonly used methods for developing classifications/ontologies included the use of existing systems (for expanding or mapping) (44) and qualitative analysis of event reports (39). The most common evaluation methods were coding or classifying some safety report samples (25), quantitative analysis of incidents based on the developed classification (24), and consensus among physicians (16). The most commonly applied evaluation criteria were reliability (27), content and face validity (9), comprehensiveness (6), usability (5), linguistic clarity (5), and impact (4), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Because of the weaknesses and strengths of the development/evaluation methods, it is advised that more than one method for development or evaluation, as well as evaluation criteria, should be used. To organize the processes of developing classification/ontologies, well-established approaches such as Methontology are recommended. The most prevalent evaluation methods applied in this domain are well fitted to the biomedical ontology evaluation methods, but it is also advised to apply some evaluation approaches such as logic, rules, and Natural language processing (NLP) based in combination with other evaluation approaches. This research can assist domain researchers in developing or evaluating domain ontologies using more complete methodologies. There is also a lack of reporting consistency in the literature and same methods or criteria were reported with different terminologies.
Topics: Biological Ontologies; Humans; Logic; Natural Language Processing; Patient Safety; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 35878822
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2022.104150 -
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical... Jun 2022Job satisfaction and retention of healthcare staff remains an ongoing issue in many health systems. Huddles have been endorsed as a mechanism to improve patient safety... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Job satisfaction and retention of healthcare staff remains an ongoing issue in many health systems. Huddles have been endorsed as a mechanism to improve patient safety by improving teamwork, collaboration, and communication in teams.
AIM
This study aims to synthesises the literature to investigate the impact of huddles on job satisfaction, teamwork, and work engagement in multidisciplinary healthcare teams.
METHODS
Five academic databases were searched to conduct a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature published from January 2000 to January 2020. Articles were included if they (1) featured a daily huddle, were conducted in a healthcare setting, and involved a multidisciplinary team and (2) measured variables including job satisfaction, work engagement, or teamwork. Results were reported in accordance with the systematic synthesis without meta-analysis and preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. We identified 445 articles of which 12 met the eligibility criteria and are included in this review.
RESULTS
All 12 included studies found a predominantly positive impact on teamwork and job satisfaction. None of the studies discussed or reported evidence of the impact of huddles on work engagement. This review highlights the value of a daily multidisciplinary healthcare team huddle in improving job satisfaction and teamwork for the healthcare staff involved. However, there is a dearth of high-quality, peer-reviewed evidence regarding the direct impact of huddles on job satisfaction, teamwork and in particular on work engagement. Further research-particularly controlled studies on adoption, implementation and outcomes for healthcare team culture-is needed to further assess this intervention.
Topics: Communication; Delivery of Health Care; Humans; Job Satisfaction; Patient Care Team; Patient Safety; Work Engagement
PubMed: 35174941
DOI: 10.1111/jep.13648 -
Journal of Patient Safety Aug 2021There have been efforts to understand the epidemiology of iatrogenic harm in hospitals and primary care and to improve the safety of care provision. There has in...
BACKGROUND
There have been efforts to understand the epidemiology of iatrogenic harm in hospitals and primary care and to improve the safety of care provision. There has in contrast been very limited progress in relation to the safety of ambulatory dental care.
OBJECTIVES
To provide a comprehensive overview of the range and frequencies of existing evidence on patient safety incidents and adverse events in ambulatory dentistry.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for articles reporting events that could have or did result in unnecessary harm in ambulatory dental care. We extracted and synthesized data on the types and frequencies of patient safety incidents and adverse events.
RESULTS
Forty articles were included. We found that the frequencies varied very widely between studies; this reflected differences in definitions, populations studied, and sampling strategies. The main 5 PSIs we identified were errors in diagnosis and examination, treatment planning, communication, procedural errors, and the accidental ingestion or inhalation of foreign objects. However, little attention was paid to wider organizational issues.
CONCLUSIONS
Patient safety research in dentistry is immature because current evidence cannot provide reliable estimates on the frequency of patient safety incidents in ambulatory dental care or the associated disease burden. Well-designed epidemiological investigations are needed that also investigate contributory factors.
Topics: Dental Care; Hospitals; Humans; Medical Errors; Patient Safety; Primary Health Care
PubMed: 27611771
DOI: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000316 -
Patient Safety and Quality Improvement in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery: A Systematic Review.The Laryngoscope Jan 2021The current landscape of patient safety/quality improvement (PS/QI) research dedicated to Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (OHNS) has not been established. This...
OBJECTIVE
The current landscape of patient safety/quality improvement (PS/QI) research dedicated to Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (OHNS) has not been established. This systematic review aims to define the breadth and depth of PS/QI research dedicated to OHNS and to identify knowledge gaps as well as potential areas of future study.
METHODS
The study protocol was developed a priori using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) process. A computerized Ovid/Medline database search was conducted (January 1, 1965-September 30, 2019). Similar computerized searches were conducted using Cochrane Database, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Articles were classified by year, subspecialty, PS/QI category, Institute of Medicine (IOM) Crossing the Chasm categories, and World Health Organization (WHO) subclass.
RESULTS
Computerized searches yielded 11,570 eligible articles, 738 (6.4%) of which met otolaryngology PS/QI inclusion criteria; 178 (24.1%) were not specific to any one subspecialty. The most prevalent subspecialty foci were head and neck (29.9%), pediatric otolaryngology (16.9%), and otology/neurotology (11.0%). Studies examining complications or risk factors (32.0%) and outcomes/quality measures (16.3%) were the most common foci. Classification by the IOM included effective care (31.4%), safety (29.9%), and safety/effective care (25.3%). Most research fell into the WHO categories of understanding causes (28.5%) or measuring harm (28.3%).
CONCLUSION
Most OHNS PS/QI projects (32.0%) focus on reporting complications or risk factors, followed by outcomes/quality measures (16.3%). Knowledges gaps for future research include healthcare disparities, multidisciplinary care, and the WHO category of studies translating evidence into safer care.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
NA Laryngoscope, 131:33-40, 2021.
Topics: Humans; Otolaryngology; Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases; Patient Safety; Quality Improvement
PubMed: 32057101
DOI: 10.1002/lary.28538 -
Journal of Clinical Nursing Mar 2015This systematic review aims to synthesise the existing research on how patients participate in patient safety initiatives. (Review)
Review
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
This systematic review aims to synthesise the existing research on how patients participate in patient safety initiatives.
BACKGROUND
Ambiguities remain about how patients participate in routine measures designed to promote patient safety.
DESIGN
Systematic review using integrative methods.
METHODS
Electronic databases were searched using keywords describing patient involvement, nursing input and patient safety initiatives to retrieve empirical research published between 2007 and 2013. Findings were synthesized using the theoretical domains of Vincent's framework for analysing risk and safety in clinical practice: "patient", "healthcare provider", "task", "work environment", "organisation & management".
RESULTS
We identified 17 empirical research papers: four qualitative, one mixed-method and 12 quantitative designs. All 17 papers indicated that patients can participate in safety initiatives.
CONCLUSIONS
Improving patient participation in patient safety necessitates considering the patient as a person, the nurse as healthcare provider, the task of participation and the clinical environment. Patients' knowledge, health conditions, beliefs and experiences influence their decisions to engage in patient safety initiatives. An important component of the management of long-term conditions is to ensure that patients have sufficient knowledge to participate. Healthcare providers may need further professional development in patient education and patient care management to promote patient involvement in patient safety, and ensure that patients understand that they are 'allowed' to inform nurses of adverse events or errors. A healthcare system characterised by patient-centredness and mutual acknowledgement will support patient participation in safety practices. Further research is required to improve international knowledge of patient participation in patient safety in different disciplines, contexts and cultures.
RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE
Patients have a significant role to play in enhancing their own safety while receiving hospital care. This review offers a framework for clinicians to develop comprehensive practical guidelines to support patient involvement in patient safety.
Topics: Humans; Patient Participation; Patient Safety
PubMed: 25178172
DOI: 10.1111/jocn.12664 -
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma,... Jul 2017This systematic review aimed to describe non-conveyance in ambulance care from patient-safety and ambulance professional perspectives. The review specifically focussed... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review aimed to describe non-conveyance in ambulance care from patient-safety and ambulance professional perspectives. The review specifically focussed at describing (1) ambulance non-conveyance rates, (2) characteristics of non-conveyed patients, (3) follow-up care after non-conveyance, (4) existing guidelines or protocols, and (5) influencing factors during the non-conveyance decision making process.
METHODS
We systematically searched MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and reference lists of included articles, in June 2016. We included all types of peer-reviewed designs on the five topics. Couples of two independent reviewers performed the selection process, the quality assessment, and data extraction.
RESULTS
We included 67 studies with low to moderate quality. Non-conveyance rates for general patient populations ranged from 3.7%-93.7%. Non-conveyed patients have a variety of initial complaints, common initial complaints are related to trauma and neurology. Furthermore, vulnerable patients groups as children and elderly are more represented in the non-conveyance population. Within 24 h-48 h after non-conveyance, 2.5%-6.1% of the patients have EMS representations, and 4.6-19.0% present themselves at the ED. Mortality rates vary from 0.2%-3.5% after 24 h, up to 0.3%-6.1% after 72 h. Criteria to guide non-conveyance decisions are vital signs, ingestion of drugs/alcohol, and level of consciousness. A limited amount of non-conveyance guidelines or protocols is available for general and specific patient populations. Factors influencing the non-conveyance decision are related to the professional (competencies, experience, intuition), the patient (health status, refusal, wishes and best interest), the healthcare system (access to general practitioner/other healthcare facilities/patient information), and supportive tools (online medical control, high risk card).
CONCLUSIONS
Non-conveyance rates for general and specific patient populations vary. Patients in the non-conveyance population present themselves with a variety of initial complaints and conditions, common initial complaints or conditions are related to trauma and neurology. After non-conveyance, a proportion of patients re-enters the emergency healthcare system within 2 days. For ambulance professionals the non-conveyance decision-making process is complex and multifactorial. Competencies needed to perform non-conveyance are marginally described, and there is a limited amount of supportive tools is available for general and specific non-conveyance populations. This may compromise patient-safety.
Topics: Air Ambulances; Clinical Decision-Making; Humans; Patient Safety; Patient Selection
PubMed: 28716132
DOI: 10.1186/s13049-017-0409-6 -
Journal of Patient Safety Sep 2015In the past 13 years since the Institute of Medicine report, To Err is Human, was published, considerable attention was placed on the relationship between patient safety... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
In the past 13 years since the Institute of Medicine report, To Err is Human, was published, considerable attention was placed on the relationship between patient safety culture and patient outcomes. Research to understand this relationship has been conducted; however, now, it is important to systematically review these studies to determine if there are tools, levels of measure and outcomes that have been shown to result in significant correlations.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this review is to evaluate the state of research connecting patient safety culture and patient outcomes to determine nurse-sensitive patient outcomes that have been significantly correlated to culture of safety and commonly used tools to measure culture of safety in the studies with significant correlations.
DATA SOURCES
Published English only research articles were considered for the review. Only studies that directly measured patient outcomes in relationship to patient safety culture in hospitals involving registered nurses as a participant were included.
RESULTS
Evidence of relationships between patient safety culture and patient outcomes exist at the hospital and nursing unit level of analysis; however, the number of studies finding statistically significant correlations particularly using nurse-sensitive outcomes is limited.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings from this review suggest that there are emerging trends indicating that the specific patient safety culture measurement tools, the level of analysis, and selection of outcome measures are important considerations in study design. More research is needed to determine interventions that improve patient safety culture and outcomes.
Topics: England; Humans; Organizational Culture; Patient Outcome Assessment; Patient Safety; Practice Patterns, Nurses'; Safety Management
PubMed: 24583952
DOI: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000058 -
The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery May 2023Cleft lip and/or palate repair techniques require continued reevaluation of best practice through high-quality evidence. The objective of this systematic review was to...
BACKGROUND
Cleft lip and/or palate repair techniques require continued reevaluation of best practice through high-quality evidence. The objective of this systematic review was to highlight the existing evidence for patient safety and quality improvement (QI) initiatives in cleft lip and palate surgery.
METHODS
A systematic review of published literature evaluating patient safety and QI in patients with cleft lip and/or palate was conducted from database inception to June 9, 2022, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines. Quality appraisal of included studies was conducted using Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies, Cochrane, or a Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 instruments, according to study type.
RESULTS
Sixty-one studies met inclusion criteria, with most published between 2010 and 2020 (63.9%). Randomized controlled trials represented the most common study design (37.7%). Half of all included studies were related to the topic of pain and analgesia, with many supporting the use of infraorbital nerve block using 0.25% bupivacaine. The second most common intervention examined was use of perioperative antibiotics in reducing fistula and infection (11.5%). Other studies examined optimal age and closure material for cleft lip repair, early recovery after surgery protocols, interventions to reduce blood loss, and safety of outpatient surgery.
CONCLUSIONS
Patient safety and QI studies in cleft surgery were of moderate quality overall and covered a wide range of interventions. To further enhance PS in cleft repair, more high-quality research in the areas of perioperative pharmaceutical usage, appropriate wound closure materials, and optimal surgical timing are needed.
Topics: Humans; Cleft Lip; Cleft Palate; Patient Safety; Quality Improvement; Pain
PubMed: 36730883
DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000009094 -
American Journal of Surgery Jul 2022Previous systematic reviews have found high burnout in healthcare professionals is associated with poorer patient care. However, no review or meta-analysis has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Previous systematic reviews have found high burnout in healthcare professionals is associated with poorer patient care. However, no review or meta-analysis has investigated this association in surgeons specifically. The present study addressed this gap, by examining the association between surgeon burnout and 1) patient safety and 2) surgical professionalism.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. We included original empirical studies that measured burnout and patient care or professionalism in surgeons. Six databases were searched (PsycINFO, Ovid MEDLINE(R), EMBASE, Cochrane Database, CINAHL, and Web of Science) from inception to February 2021. An adapted version of the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess study quality. Meta-analysis and narrative synthesis were utilised to synthesise results.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies were included in the narrative review (including 27,248 participants) and nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. Burnout was associated with a 2.5-fold increased risk of involvement in medical error (OR = 2.51, 95% Cl [1.68-3.72]). The professionalism outcome variables were too diverse for meta-analysis, however, the narrative synthesis indicated a link between high burnout and a higher risk of loss of temper and malpractice suits and lower empathy. No link was found between burnout and patient satisfaction.
CONCLUSION
There is a significant association between higher burnout in surgeons and poorer patient safety. The delivery of interventions to reduce surgeon burnout should be prioritised; such interventions should be evaluated for their potential to produce concomitant improvements in patient safety.
Topics: Burnout, Professional; Burnout, Psychological; Humans; Patient Safety; Professionalism; Surgeons
PubMed: 34974884
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.12.027