Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Multiple component patient safety intervention in English hospitals: controlled evaluation of second phase

By Amirta Benning, Mary Dixon-Woods, Ugochi Nwulu, Maisoon Ghaleb, Jeremy Dawson, Nick Barber, Bryony Dean Franklin, Alan Girling, Karla Hemming, Martin Carmalt, Gavin Rudge, Thirumalai Naicker, Amit Kotecha, M. Clare Derrington and Richard J. Lilford

Abstract

Objective: To independently evaluate the impact of the second phase of the Health Foundation’s Safer Patients Initiative (SPI2) on a range of patient safety measures. \ud Design: A controlled before and after design. Five substudies: survey of staff attitudes; review of case notes from high risk (respiratory) patients in medical wards; review of case notes from surgical patients; indirect evaluation of hand hygiene by measuring hospital use of handwashing materials; measurement of outcomes (adverse events, mortality among high risk patients admitted to medical wards, patients’ satisfaction, mortality in intensive care, rates of hospital acquired infection). \ud Setting: NHS hospitals in England. \ud Participants: Nine hospitals participating in SPI2 and nine matched control hospitals. \ud Intervention: The SPI2 intervention was similar to the SPI1, with somewhat modified goals, a slightly longer intervention period, and a smaller budget per hospital. \ud Results: One of the scores (organisational climate) showed a significant (P=0.009) difference in rate of change over time, which favoured the control hospitals, though the difference was only 0.07 points on a five point scale. Results of the explicit case note reviews of high risk medical patients showed that certain practices improved over time in both control and SPI2 hospitals (and none deteriorated), but there were no significant differences between control and SPI2 hospitals. Monitoring of vital signs improved across control and SPI2 sites. This temporal effect was significant for monitoring the respiratory rate at both the six hour (adjusted odds ratio 2.1, 99% confidence interval 1.0 to 4.3; P=0.010) and 12 hour (2.4, 1.1 to 5.0; P=0.002) periods after admission. There was no significant effect of SPI for any of the measures of vital signs. Use of a recommended system for scoring the severity of pneumonia improved from 1.9% (1/52) to 21.4% (12/56) of control and from 2.0% (1/50) to 41.7% (25/60) of SPI2 patients. This temporal change was significant (7.3, 1.4 to 37.7; P=0.002), but the difference in difference was not significant (2.1, 0.4 to 11.1; P=0.236). There were no notable or significant changes in the pattern of prescribing errors, either over time or between control and SPI2 hospitals. Two items of medical history taking (exercise tolerance and occupation) showed significant improvement over time, across both control and SPI2 hospitals, but no additional SPI2 effect. The holistic review showed no significant changes in error rates either over time or between control and SPI2 hospitals. The explicit case note review of perioperative care showed that adherence rates for two of the four perioperative standards targeted by SPI2 were already good at baseline, exceeding 94% for antibiotic prophylaxis and 98% for deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis. Intraoperative monitoring of temperature improved over time in both groups, but this was not significant (1.8, 0.4 to 7.6; P=0.279), and there were no additional effects of SPI2. A dramatic rise in consumption of soap and alcohol hand rub was similar in control and SPI2 hospitals (P=0.760 and P=0.889, respectively), as was the corresponding decrease in rates of Clostridium difficile and meticillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection (P=0.652 and P=0.693, respectively). Mortality rates of medical patients included in the case note reviews in control hospitals increased from 17.3% (42/243) to 21.4% (24/112), while in SPI2 hospitals they fell from 10.3% (24/233) to 6.1% (7/114) (P=0.043). Fewer than 8% of deaths were classed as avoidable; changes in proportions could not explain the divergence of overall death rates between control and SPI2 hospitals. There was no significant difference in the rate of change in mortality in intensive care. Patients’ satisfaction improved in both control and SPI2 hospitals on all dimensions, but again there were no significant changes between the two groups of hospitals. \ud Conclusions: Many aspects of care are already good or improving across the NHS in England, suggesting considerable improvements in quality across the board. These improvements are probably due to contemporaneous policy activities relating to patient safety, including those with features similar to the SPI, and the emergence of professional consensus on some clinical processes. This phenomenon might have attenuated the incremental effect of the SPI, making it difficult to detect. Alternatively, the full impact of the SPI might be observable only in the longer term. The conclusion of this study could have been different if concurrent controls had not been used

Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group
Year: 2011
DOI identifier: 10.1136/bmj.d199
OAI identifier: oai:lra.le.ac.uk:2381/9301
Journal:

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2010). A controlled evaluation of the second phase of a complex patient safety intervention implemented in English hospitals. doi
  2. (2007). A new risk predictionmodel for critical care: the Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre (ICNARC) model. Crit Care Med doi
  3. An epistemology of patient safety research: a framework for study design and interpretation. Part 2. Study design.Qual Saf Health Care doi
  4. (2006). Association. Primary total hip replacement: a guide to good practice.
  5. Case mix, outcome and length of stay for admissions to adult, general critical care units in England, Wales and Northern Ireland: the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre Case Mix Programme Database. Crit Care
  6. (2010). Contamination in trials of educational interventions.
  7. Early communication: does a national campaign to improve hand hygiene doi
  8. Evaluating policy and service interventions: a framework to guide selection and interpretation of study end points. doi
  9. Five years after to err is human: what have we learned? doi
  10. (2008). for Health and Clinical Excellence. Clinical guideline 65: The management of inadvertent perioperative hypothermia in adults.
  11. for Health and Clinical Excellence. Clinical Guideline 74: Prevention and treatment of surgical site infections.
  12. (2007). for Health and Clinical Excellence. Clinical Guidelines CG50. Acutely ill patients in hospital. Recognition of and response to acute illness in adults in hospital.
  13. (2010). Health. Beds open overnight in England.
  14. (2007). Health. Saving lives: reducing infection, delivering clean and safe care.
  15. (2007). Healthcare Improvement. How to guide. Prevent surgical site infections.
  16. Heterogeneity is not always noise: lessons from improvement. doi
  17. (2009). House of Commons Health Committee. Patient safety: sixth report of session 2008-09. Stationery Office,
  18. How will it work? A qualitative study of strategic stakeholders’ accounts of a patient safety initiative. Qual Saf Health Care doi
  19. (1991). Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients. doi
  20. Interrater reliability of case-note audit: a systematic review.
  21. Introduction of themedical emergency team (MET) system: a clusterrandomised controlled trial.
  22. Is the principle of a stable Heinrich ratio a myth? A multimethod analysis. Drug Saf doi
  23. Large scale organisational intervention to improve patient safety in four UK hospitals: mixed method evaluation. doi
  24. Making sense of your staff survey data.
  25. Managing people and performance: An evidencebased framework applied to health service organisations. doi
  26. Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. doi
  27. (2008). Organizing for quality: the improvement journeys of leading hospitals in Europe and the United States. doi
  28. Randomized versus historical controls for clinical trials. doi
  29. (2006). Recalibration of risk prediction models in a large multicenter cohort of admissions to adult, general critical care units in the United Kingdom. Crit Care Med doi
  30. Reducing patient mortality in hospitals: The role of human resource management. doi
  31. (2010). Safety Agency. Cleanyourhands campaign. doi
  32. Team working and effectiveness in health. doi
  33. (1995). The construction of lay expertise: AIDS activism and the forging of credibility in the reform of clinical trials. Sci Technol Hum Val doi
  34. (1985). The effects of psychologically based intervention programs on worker productivity: a meta-analysis. Pers Psychol doi
  35. The prevalence of prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis in acute hospital trusts.
  36. Trade liberalization and per capita income convergence: a difference-in-difference analysis. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.