Patient Safety and People Who Are Incarcerated

We explore a number of key relationships between patient safety and the health status of imprisoned people. This is a conceptual study drawing connections between a number of literatures including the field of patient safety, the work done on health and illness amongst imprisoned people, their social characteristics, and the carceral environment itself. We show that this is an underexplored and under-theorised field of inquiry. It also sets the scene for further investigation of not only individual and systemic factors in the health and illness experienced by such people but the role of the carceral environment. It seems clear that the risk of ill-health rises for many people who are incarcerated. Errors of both omission and commission are common in carceral environments. Risks rise for patients in such environments due to delays in diagnosis, referral and treatment. Understanding the complex and inter-related factors that increase ill-health in individuals, groups and communities provides a starting point for understanding why, when and how imprisoned people need to access and utilise healthcare, how will they are when they do so, and how. It also opens up the question of how these factors might affect their susceptibility to medical errors and adverse events

A four-year, systems-wide intervention promoting interprofessional collaboration

Background: A four-year action research study was conducted across the Australian Capital Territory health system to strengthen interprofessional collaboration (IPC) through multiple intervention activities. Methods: We developed 272 substantial IPC intervention activities involving 2,407 face-to-face encounters with health system personnel. Staff attitudes toward IPC were surveyed yearly using Heinemann et al’s Attitudes toward Health Care Teams and Parsell and Bligh’s Readiness for Interprofessional Learning scales (RIPLS). At study’s end staff assessed whether project goals were achieved. Results: Of the improvement projects, 76 exhibited progress, and 57 made considerable gains in IPC. Educational workshops and feedback sessions were well received and stimulated interprofessional activities. Over time staff scores on Heinemann’s Quality of Interprofessional Care subscale did not change significantly and scores on the Doctor Centrality subscale increased, contrary to predictions. Scores on the RIPLS subscales of Teamwork & Collaboration and Professional Identity did not alter. On average for the assessment items 33% of staff agreed that goals had been achieved, 10% disagreed, and 57% checked ‘neutral’. There was most agreement that the study had resulted in increased sharing of knowledge between professions and improved quality of patient care, and least agreement that between-professional rivalries had lessened and communication and trust between professions improved. Conclusions: Our longitudinal interventional study of IPC involving multiple activities supporting increased IPC achieved many project-specific goals, but improvements in attitudes over time were not demonstrated and neutral assessments predominated, highlighting the difficulties faced by studies targeting change at the systems level and over extended periods

Analysing the "field" of patient safety employing Bourdieusian technologies

Purpose - This paper aims to analyse the development of patient safety as a field within which patients are peripheral stakeholders. Design/methodology/approach - The authors examined the patient safety movement from the perspective of a field in which agents struggle for control over various forms of capital, including economic, social, cultural and symbolic capital. In order to undertake this analysis the authors drew on the literature on errors and patient safety, key inquiries into patient safety, and research conducted with health professionals in New South Wales, Australia. Findings - The patient safety movement has created a heightened sense of awareness of errors and risk across health systems, thereby attracting and creating significant amounts of capital. The authors argue that in the process of struggle to constitute and contain a new field of health, patients and their narratives are rendered vulnerable to appropriation and incorporation. Research limitations/implications - By considering patient safety from a sociological rather than a technical framework, it is possible to gain new insights into why reducing the levels of medical errors have proven so difficult. Practical implications - Improved knowledge of how patient safety operates as a field may contribute to more effective strategies in reducing those types of errors. Originality/value - Despite the growth in the number of publications in patient safety there has been only minimal analysis of the field itself, rather than its technical or organisational components. This paper contributes to a new way of conceptualising and enacting patient safety, one that acknowledges the vulnerability of the parties involved, particularly patients.13 page(s

An overview of clinical governance policies, practices and initiatives

Objective: To map the emergence of, and define, clinical governance; to discuss current best practices, and to explore the implications of these for boards of directors and executives wishing to promote a clinical governance approach in their health services. Methods: Review and analysis of the published and grey literature on clinical governance from 1966 to 2006. Medline and CINAHL databases, key journals and websites were systematically searched. Results: Central issues were identified in the literature as key to effective clinical governance. These include: ensuring that links are made between health services' clinical and corporate governance; the use of clinical governance to promote quality and safety through a focus on quality assurance and continuous improvement; the creation of clinical governance structures to improve safety and quality and manage risk and performance; the development of strategies to ensure the effective exchange of data, knowledge and expertise; and the sponsoring of a patient-centred approach to service delivery. Conclusions: A comprehensive approach to clinical governance necessarily includes the active participation of boards and executives in sponsoring and promoting clinical governance as a quality and safety strategy. Although this is still a relatively recent development, the signs are promising.13 page(s

Learning from disasters to improve patient safety : applying the generic disaster pathway to health system errors

In a previous paper we developed a generic disaster pathway model drawing from disaster inquiries in the space, shipping, aviation, mining, rail and nuclear industries. To test our hypothesis that our generic disaster model can be applied to healthcare errors, we ustilised three exemplar cases featuring different types and sources of errors. We found that it is possible to apply our generic disaster pathway to healthcare errors, and to identify the combination of human, organisational and design risk factors which contribute to the severity and speed at which errors occur. We conclude that error pathways provide a useful tool from which healthcare services can learn to appreciate and potentially circumvent or ameliorate errors, prior to their reaching the no-return threshold.8 page(s

Can questions of the privatization and corporatization, and the autonomy and accountability of public hospitals, ever be resolved?

Although there is a long-standing international debate concerning the privatization and corporatization of health services, there has been relatively little systematic analysis of the ways these types of reform manifest. We examine the impact of privatization and corporatization on public hospitals, and in particular on hospitals' autonomy and accountability, with two aims: to uncover the key themes in the literature, and to consider implementation issues. The review of 2,319 articles was conducted using content analysis and a discussion of selected key issues. Several major themes appear in the privatization and corporatization literature, including their use as tools in health systems reform, and the role of governments in sponsoring the processes. We show that much of the underlying argument is ideological rather than evidence based. Those who promote versions of privatization or corporatization claim that decreased government involvement in the management of hospitals leads inter alia to benefits such as greater efficiency, better quality services, and increased choice for patients. Those who argue against say that increased privatization leads to deleterious outcomes such as decreased equity, compromised efficiency and poorer quality of care. The evidence is often weak and at times conflicting. Privatization and corporatization are difficult to implement, and at best produce mixed results, and their impact seems to depend more on the motivation of the evaluator than the standard of the results. These debates are of a type that is to a large extent only resolvable ideologically.21 page(s

Implementation of a patient safety incident management system as viewed by doctors, nurses and allied health professionals

Incident reporting systems have become a central mechanism of most health services patient safety strategies. In this article we compare health professionals' anonymous, free text responses in an evaluation of a newly implemented electronic incident management system. The professions' answers were compared using classic content analysis and Leximancer, a computer assisted text analysis package. The classic analysis identified issues which differentiated the professions. More doctors commented on lack of feedback following incidents and evaluated the system negatively. More allied health staff found that the system lacked fields necessary to report incidents. More nurses complained incident reporting was time consuming. The Leximancer analysis revealed that while the professions all used the more frequently employed concepts (which described basic components of the reporting system), nurses and allied health shared many additional concepts concerned with actual reporting. Doctors applied fewer and more unique (used only by one profession) concepts when writing about the system. Doctors' unique concepts centred on criticism of the incident management system and the broader implications of safety issues, while the other professions' unique concepts focused on more practical issues. The classic analysis identified specific problems needing to be targeted in ongoing modifications of the system. The Leximancer findings, while complementing the classical analysis results, gave greater insight into professional groups' attitudes that relate to use of the system, e.g. doctors' relatively limited conceptual vocabulary regarding the system was consistent with their lower incident reporting rates. Such professional differences in reaction to healthcare innovations may constrain inter-disciplinary communication and cooperation.20 page(s

Another inquiry into public hospitals?

2 page(s

Interprofessional learning and practice can make a difference

* Interprofessional learning and practice can be positively selfreinforcing and can promote improved care. * Australia is showing leadership in the field of interprofessional collaboration. * Changing attitudes to interprofessional collaboration is a key to improving health care. Implementing interprofessional collaboration requires a multifaceted approach, and research to underpin it.2 page(s