The safe insertion of peripheral intravenous catheters : a mixed methods descriptive study of the availability of the equipment needed

Background: Intravenous cannulation is undertaken in a high proportion of hospitalised patients. Much international attention has been given to the use of care bundles to reduce the incidence of infection in these patients. However, less attention has been given to the systems required to ensure availability of the equipment needed to support these care bundles. Our objectives were to assess how reliably the equipment recommended for a peripheral intravenous care bundle was available for use, and to explore factors which contributed to its non-availability. Methods: We studied 350 peripheral cannula insertions in three NHS hospital organisations across the UK. Staff inserting cannulae were asked to report details of all equipment problems. Key staff were then interviewed to identify the causes of problems with equipment availability, using semi-structured qualitative interviews and a standard coding frame. Results: 47 equipment problems were recorded during 46 of 350 cannulations, corresponding to a reliability of 87%, or 94% if problems with sharps disposal were excluded. Overall reliability was similar in all three organisations, but the types of problem varied. Interviews revealed a variety of causes including issues associated with purchasing policies, storage facilities, and lack of teamwork and communication in relation to reordering. The many human factors related to the supply chain were highlighted. Often staff had adopted work-arounds to deal with these problems. Conclusions: Overall, 87% of cannulations had the correct and functional equipment available. Different problems were identified in different organisations, suggesting that each had resolved some issues. Supply chain management principles may be useful to support best practice in care bundle delivery. Keywords: Cannulation, Patient safety, Equipment, Care bundles, Hospital acquired bacteraemia, Systems reliabilit

How safe are clinical systems?

Th is study was commissioned by the Health Foundation to examine the extent, type and causes of failures in reliability in different healthcare systems: failures which have the potential to create risk or cause patient harm

Missing Clinical Information in NHS hospital outpatient clinics: prevalence, causes and effects on patient care

In Britain over 39,000 reports were received by the National Patient Safety Agency relating to failures in documentation in 2007 and the UK Health Services Journal estimated in 2008 that over a million hospital outpatient visits each year might take place without the full record available. Despite these high numbers, the impact of missing clinical information has not been investigated for hospital outpatients in the UK.Studies in primary care in the USA have found 13.6% of patient consultations have missing clinical information, with this adversely affecting care in about half of cases, and in Australia 1.8% of medical errors were found to be due to the unavailability of clinical information.Our objectives were to assess the frequency, nature and potential impact on patient care of missing clinical information in NHS hospital outpatients and to assess the principal causes. This is the first study to present such figures for the UK and the first to look at how clinicians respond, including the associated impact on patient care

How safe are clinical systems? Primary research into the reliability of systems within seven NHS organisations

The knowledge that poor systems can cause harm is not new, but the size of this problem has not been established systematically. This report provides groundbreaking evidence of the extent to which important clinical systems and processes fail, and the potential these failings have to harm patients. This study forms part of the Health Foundation’s work to help healthcare organisations improve the quality of services they offer. Our Safer Patients Initiative has highlighted the need to take a clinical systems approach to improving safety, since it is failings in these systems that often contribute to breakdowns in patient safety

Evaluating the effect of a digital health intervention to enhance physical activity in people with chronic kidney disease (Kidney BEAM): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in the UK

BACKGROUND: Remote digital health interventions to enhance physical activity provide a potential solution to improve the sedentary behaviour, physical inactivity, and poor health-related quality of life that are typical of chronic conditions, particularly for people with chronic kidney disease. However, there is a need for high-quality evidence to support implementation in clinical practice. The Kidney BEAM trial evaluated the clinical effect of a 12-week physical activity digital health intervention on health-related quality of life. METHODS: In a single-blind, randomised controlled trial conducted at 11 centres in the UK, adult participants (aged ≥18 years) with chronic kidney disease were recruited and randomly assigned (1:1) to the Kidney BEAM physical activity digital health intervention or a waiting list control group. Randomisation was performed with a web-based system, in randomly permuted blocks of six. Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the difference in the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form version 1.3 Mental Component Summary (KDQoL-SF1.3 MCS) between baseline and 12 weeks. The trial was powered to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 3 arbitrary units (AU) in KDQoL-SF1.3 MCS. Outcomes were analysed by an intention-to-treat approach using an analysis of covariance model, with baseline measures and age as covariates. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04872933. FINDINGS: Between May 6, 2021, and Oct 30, 2022, 1102 individuals were assessed for eligibility, of whom 340 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to the Kidney BEAM intervention group (n=173) or the waiting list control group (n=167). 268 participants completed the trial (112 in the Kidney BEAM group and 156 in the waiting list control group). All 340 randomly assigned participants were included in the intention-to treat population. At 12 weeks, there was a significant improvement in KDQoL-SF.13 MCS score in the Kidney BEAM group (from mean 44·6 AU [SD 10·8] at baseline to 47·0 AU [10·6] at 12 weeks) compared with the waiting list control group (from 46·1 AU [10·5] to 45·0 AU [10·1]; between-group difference of 3·1 AU [95% CI 1·8-4·4]; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: The Kidney BEAM physical activity platform is an efficacious digital health intervention to improve mental health-related quality of life in patients with chronic kidney disease. These findings could facilitate the incorporation of remote digital health interventions into clinical practice and offer a potential intervention worthy of investigation in other chronic conditions. FUNDING: Kidney Research UK

Evaluating the effect of a digital health intervention to enhance physical activity in people with chronic kidney disease (Kidney BEAM): A multi-centre, randomised controlled trial

BackgroundRemote digital health interventions to enhance physical activity provide a potential solution to improve the sedentary behaviour, physical inactivity, and poor health-related quality of life that are typical of chronic conditions, particularly for people with chronic kidney disease. However, there is a need for high-quality evidence to support implementation in clinical practice. The Kidney BEAM trial evaluated the clinical effect of a 12-week physical activity digital health intervention on health-related quality of life.MethodsIn a single-blind, randomised controlled trial conducted at 11 centres in the UK, adult participants (aged ≥18 years) with chronic kidney disease were recruited and randomly assigned (1:1) to the Kidney BEAM physical activity digital health intervention or a waiting list control group. Randomisation was performed with a web-based system, in randomly permuted blocks of six. Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the difference in the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form version 1.3 Mental Component Summary (KDQoL-SF1.3 MCS) between baseline and 12 weeks. The trial was powered to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 3 arbitrary units (AU) in KDQoL-SF1.3 MCS. Outcomes were analysed by an intention-to-treat approach using an analysis of covariance model, with baseline measures and age as covariates. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04872933.FindingsBetween May 6, 2021, and Oct 30, 2022, 1102 individuals were assessed for eligibility, of whom 340 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to the Kidney BEAM intervention group (n=173) or the waiting list control group (n=167). 268 participants completed the trial (112 in the Kidney BEAM group and 156 in the waiting list control group). All 340 randomly assigned participants were included in the intention-to treat population. At 12 weeks, there was a significant improvement in KDQoL-SF.13 MCS score in the Kidney BEAM group (from mean 44·6 AU [SD 10·8] at baseline to 47·0 AU [10·6] at 12 weeks) compared with the waiting list control group (from 46·1 AU [10·5] to 45·0 AU [10·1]; between-group difference of 3·1 AU [95% CI 1·8–4·4]; p<0·0001).InterpretationThe Kidney BEAM physical activity platform is an efficacious digital health intervention to improve mental health-related quality of life in patients with chronic kidney disease. These findings could facilitate the incorporation of remote digital health interventions into clinical practice and offer a potential intervention worthy of investigation in other chronic conditions

The development and internal pilot trial of a digital physical activity and emotional well-being intervention (Kidney BEAM) for people with chronic kidney disease

From Springer Nature via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2023-09-15, registration 2023-12-20, accepted 2023-12-20, epub 2024-01-06, online 2024-01-06, collection 2024-12Acknowledgements: The authors acknowledge the work of the various research teams at each site and thank all the participants involved in this research. This research was prospectively registered NCT04872933.Publication status: PublishedPelagia Koufaki - ORCID: 0000-0002-1406-3729 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1406-3729This trial assessed the feasibility and acceptability of Kidney BEAM, a physical activity and emotional well-being self-management digital health intervention (DHI) for people with chronic kidney disease (CKD), which offers live and on-demand physical activity sessions, educational blogs and videos, and peer support. In this mixed-methods, multicentre randomised waitlist-controlled internal pilot, adults with established CKD were recruited from five NHS hospitals and randomised 1:1 to Kidney BEAM or waitlist control. Feasibility outcomes were based upon a priori progression criteria. Acceptability was primarily explored via individual semi-structured interviews (n = 15). Of 763 individuals screened, n = 519 (68%, 95% CI 65 to 71%) were eligible. Of those eligible, n = 303 (58%, 95% CI 54–63%) did not respond to an invitation to participate by the end of the pilot period. Of the 216 responders, 50 (23%, 95% CI 18–29%) consented. Of the 42 randomised, n = 22 (10 (45%) male; 49 ± 16 years; 14 (64%) White British) were allocated to Kidney BEAM and n = 20 (12 (55%) male; 56 ± 11 years; 15 (68%) White British) to the waitlist control group. Overall, n = 15 (30%, 95% CI 18–45%) withdrew during the pilot phase. Participants completed a median of 14 (IQR 5–21) sessions. At baseline, 90–100% of outcome data (patient reported outcome measures and a remotely conducted physical function test) were completed and 62–83% completed at 12 weeks follow-up. Interview data revealed that remote trial procedures were acceptable. Participants’ reported that Kidney BEAM increased their opportunity and motivation to be physically active, however, lack of time remained an ongoing barrier to engagement with the DHI. An randomised controlled trial of Kidney BEAM is feasible and acceptable, with adaptations to increase recruitment, retention and engagement. Trial registration NCT04872933. Date of first registration 05/05/2021.This trial was funded by a grant from Kidney Research UK. Funding for Kidney Beam is currently supported by the four major UK charities: Kidney Research UK, Kidney Care UK, National Kidney Federation and the UK Kidney Association. HMLY is funded by the NIHR [NIHR302926]. Part of this research was carried out at the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. The funders had no role in the design, collection, analysis, interpretation of the data, or writing of this protocol.pubpu

How safe are clinical systems? Primary research into the reliability of systems within seven NHS organisations

The knowledge that poor systems can cause harm is not new, but the size of this problem has not been established systematically. This report provides groundbreaking evidence of the extent to which important clinical systems and processes fail, and the potential these failings have to harm patients. This study forms part of the Health Foundation’s work to help healthcare organisations improve the quality of services they offer. Our Safer Patients Initiative has highlighted the need to take a clinical systems approach to improving safety, since it is failings in these systems that often contribute to breakdowns in patient safety