Barriers and Facilitators to Injection Safety in Ambulatory Care Settings

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (07) ◽  
pp. 841-848 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Leback ◽  
Diep Hoang Johnson ◽  
Laura Anderson ◽  
Kelli Rogers ◽  
Daniel Shirley ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVEIdentify factors referred to as barriers and facilitators that can prevent or assist safe injection practices in ambulatory care settings to guide quality improvement.DESIGNIn this mixed-methods study, we utilized observations and interviews.SETTINGThis study was conducted at ambulatory clinics at a midwestern academic medical center from May through August 2017. Sites included a variety of clinical settings that performed intramuscular, intradermal, intravenous, or intra-articular injections.PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONSDirect observations of injections and interviews of ambulatory care staff were conducted. An observation checklist was created, including standards of injection safety from nationally recognized guidelines. Interview questions were developed using the System Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and then coded by 2 investigators.RESULTSIn total, 106 observations and 36 interviews were completed at 21 clinics. Injection safety standards with the lowest adherence included using needleless access devices to prepare injections (33%) and the proper use of multidose vials (<80%). Of 819 coded interview segments, 461 (56.3%) were considered facilitators of safe injection practices. The most commonly identified barriers were patient movement during administration, feeling rushed, and inadequate staffing. The most commonly identified facilitators were availability of supplies, experience in the practice area, and availability of safety needles and prefilled syringes.CONCLUSIONSPerceived barriers and facilitators to infection control elements of injection safety are interconnected with SEIPS elements of persons, organizations, technologies, tasks, and environment. Direct observations demonstrated that knowledge of safety injection standards does not necessarily translate to best practices and may not match self-reported data.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:841–848

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. S4-S5
Author(s):  
Naomi Kuznets ◽  
Belle Lerner ◽  
Jan Davidson

Author(s):  
Sujatha Peethala ◽  
Sridevi Garapati

Background: Injections are commonly used in healthcare settings for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of various illnesses. Unsafe injection practices put patients and healthcare providers at risk of infectious and non-infectious adverse events. Safe injection practices are part of standard precautions and are aimed at maintaining basic levels of patient safety and provider protections. Objectives of this study were to assess the knowledge and observe safety practices while giving the injections.Methods: A cross-sectional study conducted among 200 internees in Government General Hospital, Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh in the months of January and February 2010. Data was obtained by semi- structured questionnaire; analyzed by using SPSS software version16.0 at p<0.05 significance level.Results: In the present study, knowledge of internees was enquired into and practices were also observed in various aspects of injection safety. Knowledge on washing hands before giving injection was 64% but when it comes to practice, it was only 29%; knowledge on use of hub-cutter after giving injection was found to be 48% but in practice hub-cutter use was observed to be very less (5.5%); knowledge on safe disposal of used syringes was 42% but only 9.0% were practicing safe disposal. Similarly knowledge on use of color coded bags according to guidelines was 40.5% and in practice it was observed to be 14%.Conclusions: In the present study knowledge and practices on injection safety was found to be poor; dissemination of IEC, behavior change campaigns and continuing education on universal precautions and proper disposal of injection related waste was recommended. 


2017 ◽  
Vol 08 (04) ◽  
pp. 1031-1043 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Rudin ◽  
Christopher Fanta ◽  
Zachary Predmore ◽  
Kevin Kron ◽  
Maria Edelen ◽  
...  

Background mHealth apps may be useful tools for supporting chronic disease management. Objective Our aim was to apply user-centered design principles to efficiently identify core components for an mHealth-based asthma symptom–monitoring intervention using patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Methods We iteratively combined principles of qualitative research, user-centered design, and “gamification” to understand patients' and providers' needs, develop and refine intervention components, develop prototypes, and create a usable mobile app to integrate with clinical workflows. We identified anticipated benefits and burdens for stakeholders. Results We conducted 19 individual design sessions with nine adult patients and seven clinicians from an academic medical center (some were included multiple times). We identified four core intervention components: (1) Invitation—patients are invited by their physicians. (2) Symptom checks—patients receive weekly five-item questionnaires via the app with 48 hours to respond. Depending on symptoms, patients may be given the option to request a call from a nurse or receive one automatically. (3) Patient review—in the app, patients can view their self-reported data graphically. (4) In-person visit—physicians have access to patient-reported symptoms in the electronic health record (EHR) where they can review them before in-person visits. As there is currently no location in the EHR where physicians would consistently notice these data, recording a recent note was the best option. Benefits to patients may include helping decide when to call their provider and facilitating shared decision making. Benefits to providers may include saving time discussing symptoms. Provider organizations may need to pay nurses extra, but those costs may be offset by reduced visits and hospitalizations. Conclusion Recent systematic reviews show inconsistent outcomes and little insight into functionalities required for mHealth asthma interventions, highlighting the need for systematic intervention design. We identified specific features for adoption and engagement that meet the stated needs of users for asthma symptom monitoring.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Anita Shankar Acharya ◽  
Priyanka ◽  
Jyoti Khandekar ◽  
Damodar Bachani

Injuries caused by needle sticks and sharps due to unsafe injection practices are the most common occupational hazard amongst health care personnel. The objectives of our study were to determine the existing knowledge and practices of interns and change in their level following an information education and communication (IEC) package regarding safe injection practices and related biomedical waste management and to determine the status of hepatitis B vaccination. We conducted a follow-up study among all (106) interns in a tertiary care teaching hospital, Delhi. A predesigned semistructured questionnaire was used. IEC package in the form of hands-on workshop and power point presentation was used. A highly significant (P<0.001) improvement in the knowledge of interns was observed after intervention with respect to the “three criteria of a safe injection” and cleaning of injection site. Thus, the baseline knowledge of interns was good in certain aspects of injection safety, namely, diseases transmitted by unsafe injections and their prevention. We conclude that IEC intervention package was effective in significantly improving the interns’ knowledge regarding safe injection practices and biomedical waste management. Almost two-thirds of interns were immunised against hepatitis B before the intervention and this proportion rose significantly after the intervention.


2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 614-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Anderson ◽  
Benjamin Weissburg ◽  
Kelli Rogers ◽  
Jackson Musuuza ◽  
Nasia Safdar ◽  
...  

Most recent infection outbreaks caused by unsafe injection practices in the United States have occurred in ambulatory settings. We utilized direct observation and a survey to assess injection practices at 31 clinics. Improper vial use was observed at 13 clinics (41.9%). Pharmacy support and healthcare worker education may improve injection practices.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:614–616


2021 ◽  
pp. 089719002110306
Author(s):  
Crystal Zhou ◽  
Rose Pavlakos ◽  
Mackenzie Clark ◽  
Vicki I. Jue ◽  
Valerie B. Clinard

Telehealth allows patients to receive healthcare with the aid of technology by overcoming physical barriers. The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created challenges with regards to in person patient care. The use of video visits and telehealth increased in a rapid manner due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of this paper is to describe telehealth services utilized by pharmacists at a large, academic medical center. Pharmacists teaching and clinical services conducted via telehealth and remote methods in the inpatient and outpatient settings are discussed. The tools and platforms utilized for patient care, staff communications, and education are described. Telehealth is likely to remain in many clinical practices even after restrictions due to COVID-19 are removed; however, as we transition, a more sustainable model that includes faculty and staff development is needed. Additionally, clinical outcomes and patient and provider satisfaction for the varying visit types should continue to be examined. Although the switch to telehealth was rapid and unprecedented, it allowed a large academic medical center to continue providing patient care and learning experiences for most clinical pharmacy services.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-146
Author(s):  
Amy E. Rettig ◽  
Emily Lambrecht-Stock ◽  
Kathy Bohley ◽  
Cathy Disher ◽  
Marla Flewellen ◽  
...  

Relationship-based care (RBC), a holistic framework of caring, models partnerships in caring to permeate at levels of patient, provider–self, provider–teams, and community. Remembrance and Renewal (R&R) is a RBC practice addressing spiritual self-care. At a dedicated time and space, R&R is offered monthly, rotating through six different buildings at an academic, medical center. To date, close to 2,000 visits have occurred. Those engaging in the practice express appreciation for the space to grieve and space to renew their spirit. R&R is a RBC practice in alignment with the scope and standards of holistic nursing practice and addresses the Quadruple Aim of improving health care staff’s work–life balance.


Stroke ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew B Maas ◽  
Guy A Rordorf ◽  
Christopher J Kwolek ◽  
Joshua A Hirsch ◽  
Cheryl MacKay ◽  
...  

Background: A systematic bias leading to the underreporting of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) complications has been suggested in published reports. The possibility of an evidence-practice gap in conjunction with uncertainties regarding operator and institutional performance impede clinical decisions by practitioners for carotid revascularization. Methods: A prospective, independent monitoring system was implemented alongside an ongoing retrospective, self-reported quality assurance (QA) system for CEA at a major metropolitan tertiary care academic medical center. Independent, trained monitors from the neurology department examined all patients undergoing CEA both preoperatively and postoperatively at 24 hours and 30 days. Data was collected on patient demographics, medical history, and procedural and anatomical variables. Outcome data from the independent QA system was compared against self-reported data for the same cohort of patients, excluding CEA performed concurrently with another procedure (typically cardiac surgeries) or non-vascular surgeons. Results: From July 2008 through June 2010 vascular surgeons performed 462 isolated CEA at the institution. Stroke and death was detected at greater frequency by the independent QA system than was self-reported by the surgical staff (3.7% versus 1.7%, p=0.05). Self-reported outcomes from the study cohort matched those previously published in a peer-reviewed journal using the same self-reporting system (1.7% versus 1.4%, p=0.52). Conclusions: In the same cohort of patients, the reported periprocedural stroke and death rate for CEA is higher comparing prospective, independent, trained monitors to surgeon self-reporting. As public health policy mandates rigorous assessment of outcome, and ultimately, performance-based reimbursement, the validity of QA systems merits heightened attention.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document