Analysing 'big picture' policy reform mechanisms: The Australian health service safety and quality accreditation scheme

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Background: Agencies promoting national health-care accreditation reform to improve the quality of care and safety of patients are largely working without specific blueprints that can increase the likelihood of success. Objective: This study investigated the development and implementation of the Australian Health Service Safety and Quality Accreditation Scheme and National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards (the Scheme), their expected benefits, and challenges and facilitators to implementation. Methods: A multimethod study was conducted using document analysis, observation and interviews. Data sources were eight government reports, 25 h of observation and 34 interviews with 197 diverse stakeholders. Results: Development of the Scheme was achieved through extensive consultation conducted over a prolonged period, that is, from 2000 onwards. Participants, prior to implementation, believed the Scheme would produce benefits at multiple levels of the health system. The Scheme offered a national framework to promote patient-centred care, allowing organizations to engage and coordinate professionals' quality improvement activities. Significant challenges are apparent, including developing and maintaining stakeholder understanding of the Scheme's requirements. Risks must also be addressed. The standardized application of, and reliable assessment against, the standards must be achieved to maintain credibility with the Scheme. Government employment of effective stakeholder engagement strategies, such as structured consultation processes, was viewed as necessary for successful, sustainable implementation. Conclusion: The Australian experience demonstrates that national accreditation reform can engender widespread stakeholder support, but implementation challenges must be overcome. In particular, the fundamental role of continued stakeholder engagement increases the likelihood that such reforms are taken up and spread across health systems

Increasing the options for reducing adverse events: Results from a modified Delphi technique

which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Background: The aim of this paper is to illustrate a simple method for increasing the range of possible options for reducing adverse events in Australian hospitals, which could have been, but was not, adopted in the wake of the landmark 1995 'Quality in Australian Health Care ' study, and to report the suggestions and the estimated lapse time before they would impact upon mortality and morbidity. Method: The study used a modified Delphi technique that first elicited options for reducing adverse events from an invited panel selected on the basis of their knowledge of the area of adverse events and quality assurance. Initial suggestions were collated and returned to them for reconsideration and comment. Results: Completed responses from both stages were obtained from 20 of those initially approached. Forty-one options for reducing AEs were identified with an average lapse time of 3.5 years. Hospital regulation had the least delay (2.4 years) and out of hospital information the greatest (6.4 years). Conclusion: Following identification of the magnitude of the problem of adverse events in the 'Quality in Australian Health Care ' study a more rapid and broad ranging response was possible than occurred. Apparently viable options for reducing adverse events and associated mortality and morbidity remain unexploited

A pilot randomised controlled trial using prophylactic dressings to minimise sacral pressure injuries in high risk hospitalised patients

This pilot randomised controlled trial examined the effect of prophylactic dressings to minimise sacral pressure injuries in high-risk hospitalised patients and assessed feasibility criteria to inform a larger study. Eighty patients were recruited at admission points (the Emergency Department and Surgical Care Unit) or directly from participating wards in the general medical surgical setting following assessment of high risk for sacral pressure injury. Participants were randomised into either the routine care or routine care and silicone foam border dressing group. Outcome assessment comprised digital photographs of each participant’s sacrum every 72 hours for evaluation by a blind-to-intervention assessor. Sixty-seven participants had at least one sacral photograph taken and assessed by a blind-to-intervention assessor. Three participants were assessed as having a Stage I pressure injury. While the use of photography was effective, feasibility criteria identified challenges related to bias, blinding, weight assessment, preparation of nursing staff and sample size estimation

Australian health policy and end of life care for people with chronic disease: An analysis

End of life care for people with advanced chronic disease is a growing international imperative, with the majority of deaths in the world now related to chronic disease. The provision of care that meets the needs of people with advanced chronic disease must be guided by appropriate policy. The key policy areas impacting directly on end of life care are related to chronic disease, palliative care and, increasingly, aged care. This paper describes the outcomes of an audit of Australian chronic disease and end of life/palliative care policies. We identified that chronic disease health policies/strategies demonstrate a focus on prevention, early intervention and management, with scant recognition of end of life care needs. The majority assume that a referral to palliative care will address end of life care needs for people with chronic disease. By contrast, palliative care policies recognise the need for the incorporation of a palliative approach into advanced chronic disease care, but there are few connections between these two policy areas. Whilst palliative care policies intersect with carer and advance care planning policies, chronic disease policy does not. Key concerns requiring consideration when developing policy in this area are discussed and possible policy options identified.Teresa Burgess, Annette Braunack-Mayer, Gregory B. Crawford, Justin Beilb

Documentation of in-hospital falls on incident reports: Qualitative investigation of an imperfect process

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Incident reporting is the prevailing approach to gathering data on accidental falls in hospitals for both research and quality assurance purposes, though is of questionable quality as staff time pressures, perception of blame and other factors are thought to contribute to under-reporting.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This research aimed to identify contextual factors influencing recording of in-hospital falls on incident reports. A qualitative multi-centre investigation using an open written response questionnaire was undertaken. Participants were asked to describe any factors that made them feel more or less likely to record a fall on an incident report. 212 hospital staff from 30 wards in 7 hospitals in Queensland, Australia provided a response. A framework approach was employed to identify and understand inter-relationships between emergent categories.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Three main categories were developed. The first, determinants of reporting, describes a hierarchical structure of primary (principle of reporting), secondary (patient injury), and tertiary determinants that influenced the likelihood that an in-hospital fall would be recorded on an incident report. The tertiary determinants frequently had an inconsistent effect. The second and third main categories described environmental/cultural facilitators and barriers respectively which form a background upon which the determinants of reporting exists.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>A distinctive framework with clear differences to recording of other types of adverse events on incident reports was apparent. Providing information to hospital staff regarding the purpose of incident reporting and the usefulness of incident reporting for preventing future falls may improve incident reporting practices.</p

An effectiveness analysis of healthcare systems using a systems theoretic approach

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The use of accreditation and quality measurement and reporting to improve healthcare quality and patient safety has been widespread across many countries. A review of the literature reveals no association between the accreditation system and the quality measurement and reporting systems, even when hospital compliance with these systems is satisfactory. Improvement of health care outcomes needs to be based on an appreciation of the whole system that contributes to those outcomes. The research literature currently lacks an appropriate analysis and is fragmented among activities. This paper aims to propose an integrated research model of these two systems and to demonstrate the usefulness of the resulting model for strategic research planning.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>To achieve these aims, a systematic integration of the healthcare accreditation and quality measurement/reporting systems is structured hierarchically. A holistic systems relationship model of the administration segment is developed to act as an investigation framework. A literature-based empirical study is used to validate the proposed relationships derived from the model. Australian experiences are used as evidence for the system effectiveness analysis and design base for an adaptive-control study proposal to show the usefulness of the system model for guiding strategic research.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Three basic relationships were revealed and validated from the research literature. The systemic weaknesses of the accreditation system and quality measurement/reporting system from a system flow perspective were examined. The approach provides a system thinking structure to assist the design of quality improvement strategies. The proposed model discovers a fourth implicit relationship, a feedback between quality performance reporting components and choice of accreditation components that is likely to play an important role in health care outcomes. An example involving accreditation surveyors is developed that provides a systematic search for improving the impact of accreditation on quality of care and hence on the accreditation/performance correlation.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>There is clear value in developing a theoretical systems approach to achieving quality in health care. The introduction of the systematic surveyor-based search for improvements creates an adaptive-control system to optimize health care quality. It is hoped that these outcomes will stimulate further research in the development of strategic planning using systems theoretic approach for the improvement of quality in health care.</p

Strategies to reduce medication errors with reference to older adults

Background  In Australia, around 59% of the general population uses prescription medication with this number increasing to about 86% in those aged 65 and over and 83% of the population over 85 using two or more medications simultaneously. A recent report suggests that between 2% and 3% of all hospital admissions in Australia may be medication related with older Australians at higher risk because of higher levels of medicine intake and increased likelihood of being admitted to hospital. The most common medication errors encountered in hospitals in Australia are prescription/medication ordering errors, dispensing, administration and medication recording errors. Contributing factors to these errors have largely not been reported in the hospital environment. In the community, inappropriate drugs, prescribing errors, administration errors, and inappropriate dose errors are most common. Objectives  To present the best available evidence for strategies to prevent or reduce the incidence of medication errors associated with the prescribing, dispensing and administration of medicines in the older persons in the acute, subacute and residential care settings, with specific attention to persons aged 65 years and over. Search strategy  Bibliographic databases PubMed, Embase, Current contents, The Cochrane Library and others were searched from 1986 to present along with existing health technology websites. The reference lists of included studies and reviews were searched for any additional literature. Selection criteria  Systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials and other research methods such as non-randomised controlled trials, longitudinal studies, cohort or case-control studies, or descriptive studies that evaluate strategies to identify and manage medication incidents. Those people who are involved in the prescribing, dispensing or administering of medication to the older persons (aged 65 years and older) in the acute, subacute or residential care settings were included. Where these studies were limited, evidence available on the general patient population was used. Data collection and analysis  Study design and quality were tabulated and relative risks, odds ratios, mean differences and associated 95% confidence intervals were calculated from individual comparative studies containing count data where possible. All other data were presented in a narrative summary. Results  Strategies that have some evidence for reducing medication incidents are: •  computerised physician ordering entry systems combined with clinical decision support systems; •  individual medication supply systems when compared with other dispensing systems such as ward stock approaches; •  use of clinical pharmacists in the inpatient setting; •  checking of medication orders by two nurses before dispensing medication; •  a Medication Administration Review and Safety committee; and •  providing bedside glucose monitors and educating nurses on importance of timely insulin administration. In general, the evidence for the effectiveness of intervention strategies to reduce the incidence of medication errors is weak and high-quality controlled trials are needed in all areas of medication prescription and delivery

The devil is in the detail - a multifactorial intervention to reduce blood pressure in co-existing diabetes and chronic kidney disease: a single blind, randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>About 30-60% of individuals are non-adherent to their prescribed medications and this risk increases as the number of prescribed medications increases. This paper outlines the development of a consumer-centred <it>Me</it>dicine <it>S</it>elf-<it>M</it>anagement <it>I</it>ntervention (MESMI), designed to improve blood pressure control and medication adherence in consumers with diabetes and chronic kidney disease recruited from specialist outpatients' clinics.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We developed a multifactorial intervention consisting of Self Blood Pressure Monitoring (SBPM), medication review, a twenty-minute interactive Digital Versatile Disc (DVD), and follow-up support telephone calls to help consumers improve their blood pressure control and take their medications as prescribed. The intervention is novel in that it has been developed from analysis of consumer and health professional views, and includes consumer video exemplars in the DVD. The primary outcome measure was a drop of 3-6 mmHg systolic blood pressure at three months after completion of the intervention. Secondary outcome measures included: assessment of medication adherence, medication self-efficacy and general wellbeing. Consumers' adherence to their prescribed medications was measured by manual pill count, self-report of medication adherence, and surrogate biochemical markers of disease control.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The management of complex health problems is an increasing component of health care practice, and requires interventions that improve patient outcomes. We describe the preparatory work and baseline data of a single blind, randomized controlled trial involving consumers requiring cross-specialty care with a follow-up period extending to 12 months post-baseline.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>The trial was registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ACTRN12607000044426).</p