Ethical frameworks for quality improvement activities: An analysis of international practice

Purpose: To examine international approaches to the ethical oversight and regulation of quality improvement and clinical audit in healthcare systems. Data sources: We searched grey literature including websites of national research and ethics regulatory bodies and health departments of selected countries. Study selection: National guidance documents were included from six countries: Ireland, England, Australia, New Zealand, the United States of America and Canada. Data extraction: Data were extracted from 19 documents using an a priori framework developed from the published literature. Results: We organised data under five themes: ethical frameworks; guidance on ethical review; consent, vulnerable groups and personal health data. Quality improvement activity tended to be outside the scope of the ethics frameworks in most countries. Only New Zealand had integrated national ethics standards for both research and quality improvement. Across countries, there is consensus that this activity should not be automatically exempted from ethical review, but requires proportionate review or organisational oversight for minimal risk projects. In the majority of countries, there is a lack of guidance on participant consent, use of personal health information and inclusion of vulnerable groups in routine quality improvement. Conclusion: Where countries fail to provide specific ethics frameworks for quality improvement, guidance is dispersed across several organisations which may lack legal certainty. Our review demonstrates a need for appropriate oversight and responsive infrastructure for quality improvement underpinned by ethical frameworks that build equivalence with research oversight. It outlines aspects of good practice, especially The New Zealand framework that integrates research and quality improvement ethics

An international perspective on definitions and terminology used to describe serious reportable patient safety incidents: A systematic review

Objectives: Patients are unintentionally, yet frequently, harmed in situations that are deemed preventable. Incident reporting systems help prevent harm, yet there is considerable variability in how patient safety incidents are reported. This may lead to inconsistent or unnecessary patterns of incident reporting and failures to identify serious patient safety incidents. This systematic review aims to describe international approaches in relation to defining serious reportable patient safety incidents. Methods: Multiple electronic and gray literature databases were searched for articles published between 2009 and 2019. Empirical studies, reviews, national reports, and policies were included. A narrative synthesis was conducted because of study heterogeneity. Results: A total of 50 articles were included. There was wide variation in the terminology used to represent serious reportable patient safety incidents. Several countries defined a specific subset of incidents, which are considered sufficiently serious, yet preventable if appropriate safety measures are taken. Terms such as “never events,” “serious reportable events,” or “always review and report” were used. The following dimensions were identified to define a serious reportable patient safety incident: (1) incidents being largely preventable; (2) having the potential for significant learning; (3) causing serious harm or have the potential to cause serious harm; (4) being identifiable, measurable, and feasible for inclusion in an incident reporting system; and (5) running the risk of recurrence. Conclusions: Variations in terminology and reporting systems between countries might contribute to missed opportunities for learning. International standardized definitions and blame-free reporting systems would enable comparison and international learning to enhance patient safety

Influencing a nation: how a leader’s interpersonal emotion regulation influences citizen compliance via trust and emotions during a global pandemic

During crises like the COVID-19 pandemic, it was necessary for political leaders to influence citizens to comply with public health measures and restrictions. These health measures (e.g., physical distancing, staying at home) had substantial negative effects on individuals’ lives and thus were sometimes met with defensive, noncooperative responses. To influence citizens’ compliance with public health guidance and nationally imposed restrictions, political leaders needed to effectively motivate them through their public communications. We argue that while negative emotions may have discouraged citizens from deviating from public health restrictions, other factors such as citizens’ trust in political leaders played a role as well. We investigated whether the perception of the interpersonal emotion regulation (IER) strategies used by government leaders in ministerial briefings impacted citizens’ compliance intentions via either negative affect or perceived trustworthiness. Across three studies based in Western Europe (Studies 1 and 2 survey, Study 3 experimental), we consistently found that a leader’s affect-improving IER strategies increased compliance intentions via perceived trustworthiness but not via negative affect. Affect-worsening IER strategies demonstrated either no effect or an indirect worsening effect on the compliance intentions of citizens. Our findings highlight the importance of IER strategies in ministerial briefings and perceived trustworthiness of political leaders in motivating citizens to comply with public health restrictions during a pandemic.</p

Implementing an initiative to promote evidence-informed practice: part 1 — a description of the Evidence Rounds programme

Abstract Background Evidence-informed practice is fundamental to the delivery of high quality health care. Delays and gaps in the translation of research into practice can impact negatively on patient care. Previous studies have reported that problems facing health care professionals such as information overload, underdeveloped critical appraisal skills, lack of time and other individual, organisational and system-level contextual factors are barriers to the uptake of evidence. Health services research in this area has been restricted largely to the evaluation of program outcomes. This paper aims to describe the implementation process of an educational initiative for health care professionals working in midwifery, neonatology or obstetrics aimed at disseminating evidence and enhancing evidence-informed clinical care. Methods We designed and implemented an educational initiative called Evidence Rounds for health care professionals working in the women and children’s division of an urban hospital in Ireland. It consisted of three core components: (1) group educational sessions examining evidence on topics chosen by staff (2) a dedicated website and (3) facilitation, enablement and support from a knowledge translation professional. We evaluated user engagement in the educational program by monitoring attendance figures and website analytics. We followed up with staff at 3, 16 and 21-month intervals after the last educational session to find out whether evidence had been implemented. We use Lavis’s organising framework for knowledge transfer and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist to describe the educational program and document the implementation process. Results Six educational sessions presented by 18 health care professionals took place over a nine month period with 148 attendances of which 85 were unique (individuals who attended at least one session). During the period spanning from one month before, during and one month after the running of the group sessions, 188 unique visitors, 331 visits and 862 page views were recorded on our website. Conclusions Audit and feedback processes can provide quantitative data to track practice outcomes. Achieving sustainable educational programs can be challenging without dedicated resources such as staffing and funding

An occupation-based lifestyle lecture intervention as part of inpatient addiction recovery treatment: Exploring occupational performance, balance and personal recovery

Introduction: Substance use disorders (SUDs) and addictive behaviours are growing problems which negatively impact health and wellbeing. Occupational therapy can support recovery by facilitating engagement in everyday activities that promote health. To date, the inclusion of occupational therapy in addiction recovery is limited and the evidence base for occupation-focused interventions is lacking. This study explores the impact of an occupational therapy-led intervention on self-reported occupational performance and occupational balance issues for people living with SUDs within an inpatient addiction service.Methodology: A quantitative pre and post-test study was implemented. The Canadian Personal Recovery Outcome Measure (C-PROM) was the sole outcome measure. The C-PROM is a self-report measure which aims to measure personal views of recovery based on rating activity engagement. The cohort of participants were recruited from referrals into 2 inpatient addiction recovery treatment programmes using purposive sampling. Descriptive statistics were run, and a Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test was used to analyse pre and post-test scoring.Results: Sixteen participants (9 male and 7 female) completed the intervention and outcome measure. The majority of participants (31.3%, n=5) were between 45 and 54 years old. 25% of the sample (n=4) were in the 35 to 44 age bracket while 18.8% (n=3) were aged 55 to 64. The majority of participants (68.8%, n=11) reported substance misuse as their main healthcare concern. The mean score on the C-PROM was significantly higher after participants received the intervention when compared with baseline scoring.Conclusion: Following engagement with an occupational therapist-led intervention participants reported increased engagement in activities and occupational performance. Participants also reported improved occupational balance and increased awareness of personal recovery needs. Further research is required to explore the effectiveness of this intervention in larger samples and to explore the transferability and sustainability of skills post discharge.</p