Patient safety in primary care: a survey of general practitioners in the Netherlands

Contains fulltext : 89814.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Primary care encompasses many different clinical domains and patient groups, which means that patient safety in primary care may be equally broad. Previous research on safety in primary care has focused on medication safety and incident reporting. In this study, the views of general practitioners (GPs) on patient safety were examined. METHODS: A web-based survey of a sample of GPs was undertaken. The items were derived from aspects of patient safety issues identified in a prior interview study. The questionnaire used 10 clinical cases and 15 potential risk factors to explore GPs' views on patient safety. RESULTS: A total of 68 GPs responded (51.5% response rate). None of the clinical cases was uniformly judged as particularly safe or unsafe by the GPs. Cases judged to be unsafe by a majority of the GPs concerned either the maintenance of medical records or prescription and monitoring of medication. Cases which only a few GPs judged as unsafe concerned hygiene, the diagnostic process, prevention and communication. The risk factors most frequently judged to constitute a threat to patient safety were a poor doctor-patient relationship, insufficient continuing education on the part of the GP and a patient age over 75 years. Language barriers and polypharmacy also scored high. Deviation from evidence-based guidelines and patient privacy in the reception/waiting room were not perceived as risk factors by most of the GPs. CONCLUSION: The views of GPs on safety and risk in primary care did not completely match those presented in published papers and policy documents. The GPs in the present study judged a broader range of factors than in previously published research on patient safety in primary care, including a poor doctor-patient relationship, to pose a potential threat to patient safety. Other risk factors such as infection prevention, deviation from guidelines and incident reporting were judged to be less relevant than by policy makers

Workplace learning from a socio-cultural perspective: creating developmental space during the general practice clerkship

Workplace learning in undergraduate medical education has predominantly been studied from a cognitive perspective, despite its complex contextual characteristics, which influence medical students’ learning experiences in such a way that explanation in terms of knowledge, skills, attitudes and single determinants of instructiveness is unlikely to suffice. There is also a paucity of research which, from a perspective other than the cognitive or descriptive one, investigates student learning in general practice settings, which are often characterised as powerful learning environments. In this study we took a socio-cultural perspective to clarify how students learn during a general practice clerkship and to construct a conceptual framework that captures this type of learning. Our analysis of group interviews with 44 fifth-year undergraduate medical students about their learning experiences in general practice showed that students needed developmental space to be able to learn and develop their professional identity. This space results from the intertwinement of workplace context, personal and professional interactions and emotions such as feeling respected and self-confident. These forces framed students’ participation in patient consultations, conversations with supervisors about consultations and students’ observation of supervisors, thereby determining the opportunities afforded to students to mind their learning. These findings resonate with other conceptual frameworks and learning theories. In order to refine our interpretation, we recommend that further research from a socio-cultural perspective should also explore other aspects of workplace learning in medical education

Prevalence and consequences of patient safety incidents in general practice in the Netherlands: a retrospective medical record review study

Contains fulltext : 97252.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Patient safety can be at stake in both hospital and general practice settings. While severe patient safety incidents have been described, quantitative studies in large samples of patients in general practice are rare. This study aimed to assess patient safety in general practice, and to show areas where potential improvements could be implemented. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patient records in Dutch general practice. A random sample of 1,000 patients from 20 general practices was obtained. The number of patient safety incidents that occurred in a one-year period, their perceived underlying causes, and impact on patients' health were recorded. RESULTS: We identified 211 patient safety incidents across a period of one year (95% CI: 185 until 241). A variety of types of incidents, perceived causes and consequences were found. A total of 58 patient safety incidents affected patients; seven were associated with hospital admission; none resulted in permanent disability or death. CONCLUSIONS: Although this large audit of medical records in general practices identified many patient safety incidents, only a few had a major impact on patients' health. Improving patient safety in this low-risk environment poses specific challenges, given the high numbers of patients and contacts in general practice

Patient safety culture measurement in general practice. Clinimetric properties of 'SCOPE'

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A supportive patient safety culture is considered to be an essential condition for improving patient safety. Assessing the current safety culture in general practice may be a first step to target improvements. To that end, we studied internal consistency and construct validity of a safety culture questionnaire for general practice (SCOPE) which was derived from a comparable questionnaire for hospitals (Dutch-HSOPS).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The survey was conducted among caregivers of Dutch general practice as part of an ongoing quality accreditation process using a 46 item questionnaire. We conducted factor analyses and studied validity by calculating correlations between the subscales and testing the hypothesis that respondents' <it>patient safety grade </it>of their practices correlated with their scores on the questionnaire.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 72 practices 294 respondents completed the questionnaire. Eight factors were identified concerning <it>handover and teamwork, support and fellowship, communication openness, feedback and learning from error, intention to report events, adequate procedures and staffing, overall perceptions of patient safety </it>and <it>expectations and actions of managers</it>. Cronbach's alpha of the factors rated between 0.64 and 0.85. The subscales intercorrelated moderately, except for the factor about intention to report events. Respondents who graded patient safety highly scored significantly higher on the questionnaire than those who did not.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The SCOPE questionnaire seems an appropriate instrument to assess patient safety culture in general practice. The clinimetric properties of the SCOPE are promising, but future research should confirm the factor structure and construct of the SCOPE and delineate its responsiveness to changes in safety culture over time.</p

A survey of community members' perceptions of medical errors in Oman

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Errors have been the concern of providers and consumers of health care services. However, consumers' perception of medical errors in developing countries is rarely explored. The aim of this study is to assess community members' perceptions about medical errors and to analyse the factors affecting this perception in one Middle East country, Oman.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Face to face interviews were conducted with heads of 212 households in two villages in North Al-Batinah region of Oman selected because of close proximity to the Sultan Qaboos University (SQU), Muscat, Oman. Participants' perceived knowledge about medical errors was assessed. Responses were coded and categorised. Analyses were performed using Pearson's χ², Fisher's exact tests, and multivariate logistic regression model wherever appropriate.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Seventy-eight percent (n = 165) of participants believed they knew what was meant by medical errors. Of these, 34% and 26.5% related medical errors to wrong medications or diagnoses, respectively. Understanding of medical errors was correlated inversely with age and positively with family income. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that a one-year increase in age was associated with a 4% reduction in perceived knowledge of medical errors (CI: 1% to 7%; p = 0.045). The study found that 49% of those who believed they knew the meaning of medical errors had experienced such errors. The most common consequence of the errors was severe pain (45%). Of the 165 informed participants, 49% felt that an uncaring health care professional was the main cause of medical errors. Younger participants were able to list more possible causes of medical errors than were older subjects (Incident Rate Ratio of 0.98; p < 0.001).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The majority of participants believed they knew the meaning of medical errors. Younger participants were more likely to be aware of such errors and could list one or more causes.</p

What do family physicians consider an error? A comparison of definitions and physician perception

BACKGROUND: Physicians are being asked to report errors from primary care, but little is known about how they apply the term "error." This study qualitatively assesses the relationship between the variety of error definitions found in the medical literature and physicians' assessments of whether an error occurred in a series of clinical scenarios. METHODS: A systematic literature review and pilot survey results were analyzed qualitatively to search for insights into what may affect the use of the term error. The National Library of Medicine was systematically searched for medical error definitions. Survey participants were a random sample of active members of the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) and a selected sample of family physician patient safety "experts." A survey consisting of 5 clinical scenarios with problems (wrong test performed, abnormal result not followed-up, abnormal result overlooked, blood tube broken and missing scan results) was sent by mail to AAFP members and by e-mail to the experts. Physicians were asked to judge if an error occurred. A qualitative analysis was performed via "immersion and crystallization" of emergent insights from the collected data. RESULTS: While one definition, that originated by James Reason, predominated the literature search, we found 25 different definitions for error in the medical literature. Surveys were returned by 28.5% of 1000 AAFP members and 92% of 25 experts. Of the 5 scenarios, 100% felt overlooking an abnormal result was an error. For other scenarios there was less agreement (experts and AAFP members, respectively agreeing an error occurred): 100 and 87% when the wrong test was performed, 96 and 87% when an abnormal test was not followed up, 74 and 62% when scan results were not available during a patient visit, and 57 and 47% when a blood tube was broken. Through qualitative analysis, we found that three areas may affect how physicians make decisions about error: the process that occurred vs. the outcome that occurred, rare vs. common occurrences and system vs. individual responsibility CONCLUSION: There is a lack of consensus about what constitutes an error both in the medical literature and in decision making by family physicians. These potential areas of confusion need further study

A Melodic Contour Repeatedly Experienced by Human Near-Term Fetuses Elicits a Profound Cardiac Reaction One Month after Birth

Human hearing develops progressively during the last trimester of gestation. Near-term fetuses can discriminate acoustic features, such as frequencies and spectra, and process complex auditory streams. Fetal and neonatal studies show that they can remember frequently recurring sounds. However, existing data can only show retention intervals up to several days after birth.Here we show that auditory memories can last at least six weeks. Experimental fetuses were given precisely controlled exposure to a descending piano melody twice daily during the 35(th), 36(th), and 37(th) weeks of gestation. Six weeks later we assessed the cardiac responses of 25 exposed infants and 25 naive control infants, while in quiet sleep, to the descending melody and to an ascending control piano melody. The melodies had precisely inverse contours, but similar spectra, identical duration, tempo and rhythm, thus, almost identical amplitude envelopes. All infants displayed a significant heart rate change. In exposed infants, the descending melody evoked a cardiac deceleration that was twice larger than the decelerations elicited by the ascending melody and by both melodies in control infants.Thus, 3-weeks of prenatal exposure to a specific melodic contour affects infants 'auditory processing' or perception, i.e., impacts the autonomic nervous system at least six weeks later, when infants are 1-month old. Our results extend the retention interval over which a prenatally acquired memory of a specific sound stream can be observed from 3-4 days to six weeks. The long-term memory for the descending melody is interpreted in terms of enduring neurophysiological tuning and its significance for the developmental psychobiology of attention and perception, including early speech perception, is discussed

Language development after cochlear implantation: an epigenetic model

Growing evidence supports the notion that dynamic gene expression, subject to epigenetic control, organizes multiple influences to enable a child to learn to listen and to talk. Here, we review neurobiological and genetic influences on spoken language development in the context of results of a longitudinal trial of cochlear implantation of young children with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss in the Childhood Development after Cochlear Implantation study. We specifically examine the results of cochlear implantation in participants who were congenitally deaf (N = 116). Prior to intervention, these participants were subject to naturally imposed constraints in sensory (acoustic–phonologic) inputs during critical phases of development when spoken language skills are typically achieved rapidly. Their candidacy for a cochlear implant was prompted by delays (n = 20) or an essential absence of spoken language acquisition (n = 96). Observations thus present an opportunity to evaluate the impact of factors that influence the emergence of spoken language, particularly in the context of hearing restoration in sensitive periods for language acquisition. Outcomes demonstrate considerable variation in spoken language learning, although significant advantages exist for the congenitally deaf children implanted prior to 18 months of age. While age at implantation carries high predictive value in forecasting performance on measures of spoken language, several factors show significant association, particularly those related to parent–child interactions. Importantly, the significance of environmental variables in their predictive value for language development varies with age at implantation. These observations are considered in the context of an epigenetic model in which dynamic genomic expression can modulate aspects of auditory learning, offering insights into factors that can influence a child’s acquisition of spoken language after cochlear implantation. Increased understanding of these interactions could lead to targeted interventions that interact with the epigenome to influence language outcomes with intervention, particularly in periods in which development is subject to time-sensitive experience