ASTRO & AAPM Launch Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System to Improve Patient Safety & Quality

2014 ◽  
Vol 36 (14) ◽  
pp. 31-33
Author(s):  
&NA;
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Improve Patient Safety ◽  
Learning System ◽  
Incident Learning ◽  
Improve Patient

Patient Safety Across Disciplines: Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 202-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne B. Evans
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Reporting System ◽  
Learning System ◽  
Error Reporting ◽  
Error Reporting System ◽  
Corrective Actions ◽  
Incident Learning

The Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System is a national error reporting system that is voluntary and confidential. Participants collect and analyze their data, then institute corrective actions so that true incident learning takes place.

RO-ILS: Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System data trends 2014-2015.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 59-59
Author(s):  
David J. Hoopes ◽  
Eric C. Ford ◽  
Nadine L. Eads ◽  
Ksenija Kapetanovic ◽  
Cindy Tomlinson
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
National Level ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Learning System ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
National Database ◽  
Junior Staff ◽  
Incident Learning

59 Background: Incident learning is one of the most effective ways to improve quality care. To facilitate patient safety improvement at a national level, American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) launched RO-ILS: Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System in June 2014. RO-ILS mission is to facilitate safer and higher quality care through a shared learning environment that is secure and non-punitive. Methods: To ensure the security and protection of data, ASTRO contracted with Clarity PSO, a federally-certified patient safety organization that operates under the auspices of the Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005. Radiation oncology practices sign a no-fee contract with Clarity PSO to participate in RO-ILS and then enter safety data into a customized web-based portal. Submitted data are analyzed and interpreted by the Radiation Oncology Healthcare Advisory Council (RO-HAC), a multi-professional team. Practices receive aggregate quarterly reports and institutional reports when substantial data are submitted. Results: During the first year, 61 US practices (123) facilities signed contracts. 42 practices entered 1259 events and 619 of these events (49%) were submitted to the national database. Types of events included: 242 (39%) incidents that reached the patient with or without harm; 206 (33%) near-misses; and 171 (28%) unsafe conditions. RO-HAC identified risk-prone processes including ineffective communication, compressed timelines to start treatment, changes to treatment during the course of therapy and junior practitioners’ errors not remedied by experienced staff. Conclusions: Data suggests that quality assurance processes were effective in catching errors; however, continued work needs to address the origin of these errors and suggest robust solutions. To facilitate improved communication, effective protocols and software enhancements are recommended to alert staff to changes in patients’ management. Policies and procedures on patient hand-offs, emergency cases and oversight of junior staff will help error mitigation. While in its infancy, RO-ILS provides useful data and will serve to improve the quality and safety of radiotherapy.

Radiation therapist (RT) perceptions and practices related to safety culture (SC) and error reporting in radiation oncology.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (8_suppl) ◽  
pp. 42-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Hashemi ◽  
Kristina Demas Woodhouse ◽  
Brian Monzon ◽  
Seth A. Rosenthal ◽  
Neha Vapiwala
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Work Experience ◽  
Learning System ◽  
Error Reporting ◽  
Additional Patient ◽  
Safety Education ◽  
Multidisciplinary Communication ◽  
Treatment Facilities ◽  
Incident Learning

42 Background: The delivery of radiotherapy is complex and demands careful management, high vigilance, and precise coordination of clinical personnel. RTs are at the frontline and are often first to discover or report an error. However, few studies have examined RT patient safety practices. We conducted a national survey to explore the attitudes, training, and experiences of RTs related to safety in radiation oncology. Methods: In 2016, an electronic survey was sent in June and July to a random sample of 1,500 RTs (~10% of licensed RTs in the US). The survey assessed department SC, error reporting, knowledge, and practices. Questions were multiple choice or recorded on a 5-point Likert scale. Results were summarized using descriptive statistics and analyzed using multivariate logistic regression. Results: A total of 702 RTs from 48 states (47% response rate) completed the survey. Respondents represented a broad distribution across practice and geographic settings with varying levels of work experience (see table). Most RTs gave their department a “Patient Safety Grade” of Excellent (61%) or Very Good (32%), especially if they had an Incident Learning System (ILS) (OR: 2.0). Most departments (58%) had an ILS; however 59% of RTs had not reported an event in the previous year. When an error occurred but did not result in patient harm, 39% of RTs said they would report it and 37% said they would not. Bullying was reported among 17% of respondents; 40% reported that burnout, stress, and anxiety negatively impacted their ability to effectively treat patients. RTs reported errors were more likely to occur with longer work days (>8hrs) and poor multidisciplinary communication during handoffs and transitions. Most (62%) reported they could benefit from additional patient safety education and training, indicating significant interest in this topic. Conclusions: The majority of RTs reported excellent SC practices within their treatment facilities. Most facilities had systems in place to report errors. The obstacles identified, the results of this study may inform future educational efforts and safety initiatives directed towards RTs and should help increase awareness of patient SC in radiation oncology.

scholarly journals Writing’s on the wall: improving the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. e001086
Author(s):  
Claire Cushley ◽  
Tom Knight ◽  
Helen Murray ◽  
Lawrence Kidd
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Improve Patient Safety ◽  
Surgical Safety Checklist ◽  
Surgical Safety ◽  
Time Out ◽  
Mandatory Requirement ◽  
Who Checklist ◽  
Improve Patient ◽  
Theatre Team

Background and problemThe WHO Surgical Safety Checklist has been shown to improve patient safety as well as improving teamwork and communication in theatres. In 2009, it was made a mandatory requirement for all NHS hospitals in England and Wales. The WHO checklist is intended to be adapted to suit local settings and was modified for use in Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. In 2018, it was decided to review the use of the adapted WHO checklist and determine whether improvements in compliance and engagement could be achieved.AimThe aim was to achieve 90% compliance and engagement with the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist by April 2019.MethodsIn April 2018, a prospective observational audit and online survey took place. The results showed compliance for the ‘Sign In’ section of the checklist was 55% and for the ‘Time Out’ section was 91%. Engagement by the entire theatre team was measured at 58%. It was proposed to move from a paper checklist to a wall-mounted checklist, to review and refine the items in the checklist and to change the timing of ‘Time Out’ to ensure it was done immediately prior to knife-to-skin.ResultsFollowing its introduction in September 2018, the new wall-mounted checklist was reaudited. Compliance improved to 91% for ‘Sign In’ and to 94% for ‘Time Out’. Engagement by the entire theatre team was achieved 100% of the time. Feedback was collected, adjustments made and the new checklist was rolled out in stages across all theatres. A reaudit in December 2018 showed compliance improved further, to 99% with ‘Sign In’ and to 100% with ‘Time Out’. Engagement was maintained at 100%.ConclusionsThe aim of the project was met and exceeded. Since April 2019, the new checklist is being used across all theatres in the Trust.

scholarly journals Understanding safety in healthcare: the system evolution, erosion and enhancement model

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Carthey
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Complex Systems ◽  
Human Error ◽  
Improve Patient Safety ◽  
New Model ◽  
System Evolution ◽  
Accident Causation ◽  
System Migration ◽  
Improve Patient

The paper summarises previous theories of accident causation, human error, foresight, resilience and system migration. Five lessons from these theories are used as the foundation for a new model which describes how patient safety emerges in complex systems like healthcare: the System Evolution Erosion and Enhancement model. It is concluded that to improve patient safety, healthcare organisations need to understand how system evolution both enhances and erodes patient safety.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document