scholarly journals Organizational conditions for engagement in quality and safety improvement: a longitudinal qualitative study of community pharmacies

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Denham L. Phipps ◽  
Christian E. L. Jones ◽  
Dianne Parker ◽  
Darren M. Ashcroft
BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e042847 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sina Furnes Øyri ◽  
Geir Sverre Braut ◽  
Carl Macrae ◽  
Siri Wiig

A new regulatory framework to support local quality and safety efforts in hospitals was introduced to the Norwegian healthcare system in 2017. This study aimed to investigate hospital managers’ perspectives on implementation efforts and the resulting work practices, to understand if, and how, the new Quality Improvement Regulation influenced quality and safety improvement activities.DesignThis article reports one study level (the perspectives of hospital managers), as part of a multilevel case study. Data were collected by interviews and analysed according to qualitative content analysis.SettingThree hospitals retrieved from two regional health trusts in Norway.Participants20 hospital managers or quality advisers selected from different levels of hospital organisations.ResultsFour themes were identified in response to the study aim: (1) adaptive capacity in hospital management and practice, (2) implementation efforts and challenges with quality improvement, (3) systemic changes and (4) the potential to learn. Recent structural and cultural changes to, and development of, quality improvement systems in hospitals were discovered (3). Participants however, revealed no change in their practice solely due to the new Quality Improvement Regulation (2). Findings indicated that hospital managers are legally responsible for quality improvement implementation and participants described several benefits with the new Quality Improvement Regulation (2). This related to adaptation and flexibility to local context, and clinical autonomy as an inevitable element in hospital practice (1). Trust and a safe work environment were described as key factors to achieve adverse event reporting and support learning processes (4).ConclusionsThis study suggests that a lack of time, competence and/or motivation, impacted hospitals’ implementation of quality improvement efforts. Hospital managers’ autonomy and adaptive capacity to tailor quality improvement efforts were key for the new Quality Improvement Regulation to have any relevant impact on hospital practice and for it to influence quality and safety improvement activities.


Author(s):  
Angela L. Rollins ◽  
Johanne Eliacin ◽  
Alissa L. Russ-Jara ◽  
Maria Monroe-Devita ◽  
Sally Wasmuth ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ada M Krzak ◽  
Jo-Anne Fowles ◽  
Alain Vuylsteke

Provision of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as part of support escalation in severe refractory acute respiratory failure in England is provided by five specialist centres that operate within a well-defined quality and safety framework. We conducted a qualitative study of the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation retrieval service provided by one of the five centres. We analysed 176 consecutive debrief reports written between October 2013 and April 2018 by the consultant. Main identified issues were short delays in retrieval predominantly due to insufficient communication or equipment failure. All issues were addressed in subsequent practice. Our results suggest a need for improved communication between the referring intensive care unit and retrieving team. Our findings highlight the value of regular reflection-based evaluation to ensure continued provision of safe and efficient service.


2006 ◽  
Vol 72 (11) ◽  
pp. 985-989 ◽  
Author(s):  
William L. Lanier

Modern medical practice, and particularly that within the hospital environment, has been under intense scrutiny in an attempt to improve patient safety and optimize outcomes. Anesthesiology has been cited as among the most successful specialties effecting improvements. According to the Institute of Medicine's 1999 report, To Err is Human, “… anesthesiology has successfully reduced anesthesia mortality rates from two deaths per 10,000 anesthetics administered, to one death per 200,000 to 300,000 anesthetics administered.” The current report reviews representative highlights from 30 years of progress in improving anesthesiology safety and offers a speculative synthesis of the factors critical to past and future successes. The seven identified points include 1) the emergence of a champion and his allies, 2) initial efforts to identify and quantify broad-reaching problems, 3) research addressing intellectually “amusing” problems of relevance to practitioners, 4) reaching out to others with focused expertise in problem prevention and problem solving, 5) sharing the responsibility for quality and safety improvement with other specialties, 6) expanding buy-in and participation within the anesthesia community, and 7) preparing for the future. The factors provide not only an accounting of anesthesiologists’ successes, but also a road map for other groups and specialties desiring to emulate the anesthesiologists’ experience.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document