scholarly journals Implementation and spread of a simple and effective way to improve the accuracy of medicines reconciliation on discharge: a hospital-based quality improvement project and success story

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. e000363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shady Botros ◽  
John Dunn

BackgroundChanges are often made to medications at times of transitions in care. Inadequate reconciliation during admission, transfer and discharge causes medication errors and increases risks of patient harm. Despite well-established multidisciplinary medicines reconciliation (MR) processes at hospital admission, our MR process at discharge; however, was poor. The main errors included failure to recommence withheld medicines and lack of documentation explaining changes made to medications on discharge. Our objective was to develop an intervention that supports prescribers to follow a simple standardised MR process at discharge to reduce these errors.MethodsWorking closely as a multidisciplinary team, we used improvement methodologies to design and test a process that reliably directs prescribers in surgery to use the inpatient prescribing chart as well as the MR on admission form as sources to create accurate discharge prescriptions. The project was segmented into testing, implementation, spread and sustainability.ResultsThe tested intervention helped the accuracy of discharge prescriptions steadily and quickly improve from 45% to 96% in the pilot ward. Following the successful implementation and sustainability in two separate pilot wards, the intervention was spread to the remaining eight wards producing a similar improvement.ConclusionsTo improve patient safety, it is crucial to ensure that information about medicines is effectively communicated when care is transferred between teams. Although this can be challenging, we’ve shown that it can be done effectively and reliably if this responsibility is equally shared by healthcare professionals from all disciplines while being supported by safe systems that make it easy to do the right thing. Successfully implementing a standardised multidisciplinary MR process at discharge can also reduce the reliance on pharmacists therefore freeing them to undertake other clinical roles.

Author(s):  
Kim McKenna ◽  
Elliot Carhart ◽  
Daniel Bercher ◽  
Andrew Spain ◽  
John Todaro ◽  
...  

Introduction: Healthcare leaders advocate for interprofessional education as a means to promote collaborative practice, enhance interdisciplinary communication, and improve patient safety in the health professions. There is little evidence specific to interprofessional simulation in paramedic education. Methods: The National Association of EMS Educators (NAEMSE) surveyed paramedic programs that were accredited or in the process of becoming accredited. Program respondents were asked to characterize their resources and their use of those resources, and then were asked about their perceptions pertaining to simulation in their program. Chi-square analysis was used to compare characteristics of programs that participated in interdisciplinary simulation with those that did not. Results: Of the 389 of 638 (61%) paramedic program survey respondents, 44% (159 of 362) report interprofessional simulation. They perceived they used the right amount of simulation more frequently than other paramedic programs X2 (1, N=362) = 8.425, p X2 (1, N=362) = 11.751, pX2 (1, N=356) = 8.838, pX2 (1, N=362) = 4.704, pX2 (1, N=362) = 11.508 pX2 (1, N=362) = 5.495, pX2 (1, N=359) = 12.595, p<0.01.Conclusion: This research suggests that paramedic programs conducting interdisciplinary simulation indicated they have greater access to resources and faculty training to support simulation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 241-246
Author(s):  
Emer Shepherd ◽  
Anne Leitch ◽  
Evonne Curran ◽  

Background: A project was designed to improve decontamination procedures in our hospitals. This included: improving skills with training provided within clinical areas, simplifying procedures to reduce variation and increasing access to decontamination products. Aim: To make it easy for healthcare workers (HCWs) to do the right thing and for HCWs to be confident that they were doing the right thing. Methods: A pre-intervention survey of 120 HCWs in 10 wards on three hospital sites identified variations in the products used, variations in precautions taken and deficits in HCWs’ capabilities due to unmet training needs. Intervention: We streamlined the available products, provided an education programme and then undertook a second survey involving 133 HCWs in 12 wards. Results: Significant improvements were attained in the reported time taken to clean and disinfect ( P < 0.0001) and in HCW capability ( P < 0.0001) (reported training received); other improvements in the use of appropriate products and the use of personal protective equipment were evident. The key finding was that a large, previously unrecognised, unmet training need existed; only 44% of HCWs in the pre-intervention survey reported having received training on the topic. Conclusion: The utility of a pre-intervention survey is critical to knowing whether any change becomes improvement and to set the priorities for change. By focusing on the process rather than the outcomes, greater improvements can be attained. The assumption that all nurses know how to clean is erroneous.


2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (7) ◽  
pp. 438-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura J Wood ◽  
Douglas A Wiegmann

Abstract Background Many patient safety organizations recommend the use of the action hierarchy (AH) to identify strong corrective actions following an investigative analysis of patient harm events. Strong corrective actions, such as forcing functions and equipment standardization, improve patient safety by either preventing the occurrence of active failures (i.e. errors or violations) or reducing their consequences if they do occur. Problem We propose that the emphasis on implementing strong fixes that incrementally improve safety one event at a time is necessary, yet insufficient, for improving safety. This singular focus has detracted from the pursuit of major changes that transform systems safety by targeting the latent conditions which consistently underlie active failures. To date, however, there are no standardized models or methods that enable patient safety professionals to assess, develop and implement systems changes to improve patient safety. Approach We propose a multifaceted definition of ‘systems change’. Based on this definition, various types and levels of systems change are described. A rubric for determining the extent to which a specific corrective action reflects a ‘systems change’ is provided. This rubric incorporates four fundamental dimensions of systems change: scope, breadth, depth and degree. Scores along these dimensions can then be used to classify corrective actions within our proposed systems change hierarchy (SCH). Conclusion Additional research is needed to validate the proposed rubric and SCH. However, when used in conjunction with the AH, the SCH perspective will serve to foster a more holistic and transformative approach to patient safety.


2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-24
Author(s):  
Gary Peter Misselbrook ◽  
◽  
Juliane Kause ◽  
Su-Ann Yeoh ◽  
◽  
...  

Over the last decade, operating theatres and Intensive Care Units (ICUs) have established systematic methods for performing procedures on patients that have been shown to reduce complications and improve patient safety. Whilst the use of procedure rooms on Acute Medicine Units (AMUs) is highly recommended by patient safety groups and Royal College publications, they are not universally available or appropriately utilised. In this article we discuss a quality improvement project that was undertaken on an AMU at a large university teaching hospital in the United Kingdom, highlighting its successes and challenges.


1989 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 35-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Doherty

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document