System hazards in managing laboratory test requests and results in primary care: medical protection database analysis and conceptual model

Objectives To analyse a medical protection organisation's database to identify hazards related to general practice systems for ordering laboratory tests, managing test results and communicating test result outcomes to patients. To integrate these data with other published evidence sources to inform design of a systems-based conceptual model of related hazards. Design A retrospective database analysis. Setting General practices in the UK and Ireland. Participants 778 UK and Ireland general practices participating in a medical protection organisation's clinical risk self-assessment (CRSA) programme from January 2008 to December 2014. Main outcome measures Proportion of practices with system risks; categorisation of identified hazards; most frequently occurring hazards; development of a conceptual model of hazards; and potential impacts on health, well-being and organisational performance. Results CRSA visits were undertaken to 778 UK and Ireland general practices of which a range of systems hazards were recorded across the laboratory test ordering and results management systems in 647 practices (83.2%). A total of 45 discrete hazard categories were identified with a mean of 3.6 per practice (SD=1.94). The most frequently occurring hazard was the inadequate process for matching test requests and results received (n=350, 54.1%). Of the 1604 instances where hazards were recorded, the most frequent was at the ‘postanalytical test stage’ (n=702, 43.8%), followed closely by ‘communication outcomes issues’ (n=628, 39.1%). Conclusions Based on arguably the largest data set currently available on the subject matter, our study findings shed new light on the scale and nature of hazards related to test results handling systems, which can inform future efforts to research and improve the design and reliability of these systems

Clinical governance, education and learning to manage health information

Purpose – This paper aims to suggest that the concept of clinical governance goes beyond a bureaucratic accountability structure and can be viewed as a negotiated balance between imperfectly aligned and sometimes conflicting goals within a complex adaptive system. On this view, the information system cannot be separated conceptually from the system of governance it supports or the people whose work it facilitates or hinders. Design/methodology/approach – The study, located within the English National Health Service (NHS) between 1999 and 2005, is case study based using a multi method approach to data collection within two primary care organisations (PCOs). The research strategy is conducted within a social constructionist ontological perspective. Findings – The findings reflect the following broad-based themes: mutual adjustment of a plurality of stakeholder perceptions, preferences and priorities; the development of information and communication systems, empowered by informatics; an emphasis on education and training to build capacity and capability. Research limitations/implications – Limitations of case study methodology include a tendency to provide selected accounts. These are potentially biased and risk trivialising findings. Rooted in specific context, their generalisability to other contexts is limited by the extent to which contexts are similar. Reasonable attempts were made to minimise any bias. The diversity of data collection methods used in the study was an attempt to counterbalance the limitations highlighted in one method by strength from alternative techniques. Practical implications – The paper makes recommendations in two key governance areas: education and learning to manage health information. In practice, the lessons learned provide opportunities to inform future approaches to health informatics educational programmes. Originality/value – With regard to topicality, it is suggested that many of the developmental issues highlighted during the establishment of quality improvement programmes within primary care organisations (PCGs/PCTs) are relevant in the light of current NHS reforms and move towards commissioning consortia

Does the engagement of clinicians and organisations in research improve healthcare performance: a three-stage review

Objective: There is a widely held assumption that engagement by clinicians and healthcare organisations in research improves healthcare performance at various levels, but little direct empirical evidence has previously been collated. The objective of this study was to address the question: Does research engagement (by clinicians and organizations) improve healthcare performance? Methods: An hourglass-shaped review was developed, consisting of three stages: (1) a planning and mapping stage; (2) a focused review concentrating on the core question of whether or not research engagement improves healthcare performance; and (3) a wider (but less systematic) review of papers identified during the two earlier stages, focusing on mechanisms. Results: Of the 33 papers included in the focused review, 28 identified improvements in health services performance. Seven out of these papers reported some improvement in health outcomes, with others reporting improved processes of care. The wider review demonstrated that mechanisms such as collaborative and action research can encourage some progress along the pathway from research engagement towards improved healthcare performance. Organisations that have deliberately integrated the research function into organisational structures demonstrate how research engagement can, among other factors, contribute to improved healthcare performance. Conclusions: Current evidence suggests that there is an association between the engagement of individuals and healthcare organisations in research and improvements in healthcare performance. The mechanisms through which research engagement might improve healthcare performance overlap and rarely act in isolation, and their effectiveness often depends on the context in which they operate. Strengths and limitations of this study • This review brings together for the first time a diverse body of literature addressing whether engaging clinicians and healthcare organisations in research is the likely to improve healthcare performance • It also explores the mechanisms through which improvement is achieved to try and understand how any improvements might come about • However, it relies on the quality and coverage of the existing literature • It is an extremely complex topic, but nonetheless one worthy of further exploration, particularly given the pressure to justify research spending in healthcare systems, and to encourage its implementation.UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Service Delivery and Organisation (SDO) programme ( project number HS&DR- 10/1012/09

What fosters or prevents interprofessional teamworking in primary and community care? A literature review

Background: The increase in prevalence of long-term conditions in Western societies, with the subsequent need for non-acute quality patient healthcare, has brought the issue of collaboration between health professionals to the fore. Within primary care, it has been suggested that multidisciplinary teamworking is essential to develop an integrated approach to promoting and maintaining the health of the population whilst improving service effectiveness. Although it is becoming widely accepted that no single discipline can provide complete care for patients with a long-term condition, in practice, interprofessional working is not always achieved. Objectives: This review aimed to explore the factors that inhibit or facilitate interprofessional teamworking in primary and community care settings, in order to inform development of multidisciplinary working at the turn of the century. Design: A comprehensive search of the literature was undertaken using a variety of approaches to identify appropriate literature for inclusion in the study. The selected articles used both qualitative and quantitative research methods. Findings: Following a thematic analysis of the literature, two main themes emerged that had an impact on interprofessional teamworking: team structure and team processes. Within these two themes, six categories were identified: team premises; team size and composition; organisational support; team meetings; clear goals and objectives; and audit. The complex nature of interprofessional teamworking in primary care meant that despite teamwork being an efficient and productive way of achieving goals and results, several barriers exist that hinder its potential from becoming fully exploited; implications and recommendations for practice are discussed. Conclusions: These findings can inform development of current best practice, although further research needs to be conducted into multidisciplinary teamworking at both the team and organisation level, to ensure that enhancement and maintenance of teamwork leads to an improved quality of healthcare provision. © 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Understanding patient safety performance and educational needs using the ‘Safety-II’ approach for complex systems

Participation in projects to improve patient safety is a key component of general practice (GP) specialty training, appraisal and revalidation. Patient safety training priorities for GPs at all career stages are described in the Royal College of General Practitioners’ curriculum. Current methods that are taught and employed to improve safety often use a ‘find-and-fix’ approach to identify components of a system (including humans) where performance could be improved. However, the complex interactions and inter-dependence between components in healthcare systems mean that cause and effect are not always linked in a predictable manner. The Safety-II approach has been proposed as a new way to understand how safety is achieved in complex systems that may improve quality and safety initiatives and enhance GP and trainee curriculum coverage. Safety-II aims to maximise the number of events with a successful outcome by exploring everyday work. Work-as-done often differs from work-as-imagined in protocols and guidelines and various ways to achieve success, dependent on work conditions, may be possible. Traditional approaches to improve the quality and safety of care often aim to constrain variability but understanding and managing variability may be a more beneficial approach. The application of a Safety-II approach to incident investigation, quality improvement projects, prospective analysis of risk in systems and performance indicators may offer improved insight into system performance leading to more effective change. The way forward may be to combine the Safety-II approach with ‘traditional’ methods to enhance patient safety training, outcomes and curriculum coverage

Organizing for Higher Performance: Case Studies of Organized Delivery Systems

Offers lessons learned from healthcare delivery systems promoting the attributes of an ideal model as defined by the Fund: information continuity, care coordination and transitions, system accountability, teamwork, continuous innovation, and easy access

UK community health visiting: challenges faced during lean implementation

This paper presents an overview of the challenges and potential of lean implementation for the health visiting service in England and examines the rhetoric and the reality of the situation. It is coauthored by academic researchers and senior service providers so as to embrace the multidimensional issues impacting on this subject. If lean thinking is to be implemented in relation to health visiting, it is important to understand how it is likely to be viewed by practitioners and line managers in settings where it is used. In order to contextualize the discussion, an introduction to the roles, systems, and structures of health visiting are provided. The literature on what lean implementation is, what it means, and in particular the application and potential of the approach to primary care and public health services is reviewed. The process and findings from a focus group convened within a large primary care organization in the National Health Service during their lean implementation is reported. The paper concludes that it is important for staff at all levels to see a clear link between strategic aims and objectives and the planning processes operated by providers and commissioners. It appears that the successful introduction of lean thinking should focus more on productive working and thereby reducing waste. This has the potential to refresh workforce models to ensure that health visiting and other practitioners liberate the use of their specialist knowledge and skills. In a context of enhanced partnership working, the stage is then set for providers to add value to the whole system and together improve service user outcomes

Applying thematic synthesis to interpretation and commentary in epidemiological studies: identifying what contributes to successful interventions to promote hand hygiene in patient care

Objectives: Hand hygiene is considered the most important preventive measure for healthcare associated infections, but adherence is suboptimal. We previously undertook a Cochrane Review which demonstrated that interventions to improve adherence are moderately effective. Impact varied between organisations and sites with the same intervention and implementation approaches. This study seeks to explore these differences. Methods: A thematic synthesis was applied to the original authors’ interpretation and commentary that offered explanations of how hand hygiene interventions exerted their effects and suggested reasons why success varied. The synthesis used a published Cochrane Review followed by three-stage synthesis. Results: Twenty-one papers were reviewed: eleven randomised, one non-randomised and nine interrupted time series studies. Thirteen descriptive themes were identified. They reflected a range of factors perceived to influence effectiveness. Descriptive themes were synthesised into three analytical themes: Methodological Explanations for failure or success (e.g. Hawthorne Effect); and two related themes that address issues with implementing hand hygiene interventions: Successful implementation needs leadership and cooperation throughout the organisation (e.g. visible managerial support); and Understanding the context and aligning the intervention with it drives implementation (e.g. embedding the intervention into wider patient safety initiatives). Conclusions: The analytical themes help to explain the original authors’ perceptions of the degree to which interventions were effective and suggested new directions for research: exploring ways to avoid the Hawthorne effect; exploring the impact of components of multimodal interventions; the use of theoretical frameworks for behaviour change; potential to embed interventions into wider patient safety initiatives; adaptations to demonstrate sustainability; and the development of systematic approaches to implementation. Our findings corroborate studies exploring the success or failure of other clinical interventions: context and leadership are important