scholarly journals From the Editor-in-Chief

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kichu Nair
Keyword(s):  
Professional Learning ◽  
Improve Patient Safety ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Emergency Rooms ◽  
Allied Health Professionals ◽  
Pain Management Program ◽  
Corporate Memory ◽  
Ongoing Support ◽  
Difficult Times ◽  
Improve Patient

Welcome to the 3rd Volume, 1st Issue of Health Education in Practice: Journal of Research for Professional Learning This is my first editorial.  Let me thank David Schmidt for keeping everything in order and working beyond his call of duty in these difficult times. I do hope he will continue to work with us and bring in his corporate memory to provide ongoing support and leadership to the Journal. I would also like to thank Mark Parton who has provided his expertise in a copyediting capacity and has been critical to the behind the scenes work of the journal. This issue reflects the philosophy of HETI – Interprofessional care and education. The first paper by Simon Holliday and colleagues is about prescribing for chronic pain which is a major issue in our community. They have shown how to provide a multifaceted pain management program and how the General Practitioners can be upskilled. Triage nurses have to be efficient and effective in running our emergency rooms. Thawley and colleagues have done a survey of educational needs of triage nurses and have come up with some interesting suggestions to improve patient safety and outcomes. For optimum patient care, we need allied health professionals who are fit to practice. Farlie and colleagues have explored strategies for this. Simulation training is the way we prepare students for the future in many curricula. Ryall et al explore MASK-ED for physiotherapy students to make simulation more authentic. We look forward to their next paper on this protocol.  I do hope in these challenging times, you are all keeping well, both physically and mentallyAs somebody said, ask your colleagues, what matters to you and not what is the matter with you. We are all together, in this difficult COVID times.

Non-medical prescribing

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-79
Author(s):  
Helen Crawley
Keyword(s):  
Health Professionals ◽  
Improve Patient Safety ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Prescribe Medication ◽  
National Formulary ◽  
Allied Health Professionals ◽  
Chemical Reagents ◽  
Dental Practitioners ◽  
Professional Body ◽  
Improve Patient

Historically, doctors and dentists were the only ‘independent prescribers’ able to assess patients, make a diagnosis and prescribe medication. Doctors are able to prescribe any legally allowable medications, appliances, devices or chemical reagents. Dentists are limited to prescribing items in the ‘Dental Practitioners’ Formulary’, listed in the back of the British National Formulary. More recently, legislation has allowed allied health professionals to write prescriptions under certain circumstances, once they have completed appropriate training. Once obtained, qualifications in prescribing are registered with the practitioners’ professional body. Health professionals who do not have prescribing rights can only supply or administer prescription-only medicines under ‘patient specific directions’ or ‘patient group directions’. This article summarises the current mechanisms by which patients can legally receive any prescription-only medicines that they need. It also looks at how using these mechanisms can improve patient safety and patient access to clinical services.

‘Do not Do’ Recommendations in Hemophilia

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 168-174
Author(s):  
Hortensia De la Corte-Rodriguez ◽  
E. Carlos Rodriguez-Merchan ◽  
M. Teresa Alvarez-Roman ◽  
Monica Martin-Salces ◽  
Victor Jimenez-Yuste
Keyword(s):  
Improve Patient Safety ◽  
Health Resources ◽  
Fresh Frozen Plasma ◽  
Factor Ix ◽  
Levels Of Care ◽  
Fresh Frozen ◽  
History Of ◽  
Improve Patient ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Frozen Plasma

Background: It is important to discard those practices that do not add value. As a result, several initiatives have emerged. All of them try to improve patient safety and the use of health resources. Purpose: To present a compendium of "do not do recommendations" in the context of hemophilia. Methods: A review of the literature and current clinical guidelines has been made, based on the best evidence available to date. Results: The following 13 recommendations stand out: 1) Do not delay the administration of factor after trauma; 2) do not use fresh frozen plasma or cryoprecipitate; 3) do not use desmopressin in case of hematuria; 4) do not change the product in the first 50 prophylaxis exposures; 5) do not interrupt immunotolerance; 6) do not administer aspirin or NSAIDs; 7) do not administer intramuscular injections; 8) do not do routine radiographs of the joint in case of acute hemarthrosis; 9) Do not apply closed casts for fractures; 10) do not discourage the performance of physical activities; 11) do not deny surgery to a patient with an inhibitor; 12) do not perform instrumental deliveries in fetuses with hemophilia; 13) do not use factor IX (FIX) in patients with hemophilia B with inhibitor and a history of anaphylaxis after administration of FIX. Conclusions: The information mentioned previously can be useful in the management of hemophilia, from different levels of care. As far as we know, this is the first initiative of this type regarding hemophilia.

scholarly journals The Importance of Perceived Relevance: A Qualitative Evaluation of Patient’s Perceptions of Value and Impact Following a Low-Intensity Group-Based Pain Management Program

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
Joshua W. Pate ◽  
Elizabeth Tran ◽  
Seema Radhakrishnan ◽  
Andrew M. Leaver
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Qualitative Evaluation ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Patient Beliefs ◽  
Pain Management Program ◽  
Westmead Hospital ◽  
Group A ◽  
Perceived Relevance ◽  
Beliefs And Attitudes

Background and objectives: Limited evidence exists exploring perceptions of which aspects of a pain management program are perceived as valuable and impactful. The aim of this study was to explore patient beliefs about which aspects of a pain management program were valued and/or had perceived impact. Materials and Methods: One-on-one structured interviews were conducted with 11 adults three months after their completion of the Spark Pain Program at Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia. Concepts in the transcripts were inductively identified and explored, utilizing thematic analysis to better understand their relevance to the study aim. Results: Four themes emerged: (1) “The program overall was positive, but…”; (2) “I valued my improved knowledge and understanding of pain, but…”; (3) “I valued the stretching/relaxation/pacing/activity monitoring”; and (4) “I valued being part of a supportive and understanding group”. Participants reported that they liked being treated as an individual within the group. A lack of perceived personal relevance of key messages was identified in some participants; it appears that patients in pain programs must determine that changes in knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes are personally relevant in order for the changes to have a significant impact on them. Conclusions: This study provides new insights into aspects of a pain management program that were perceived as valuable and impactful, areas that “missed the mark”, and hypotheses to guide the implementation of service delivery and program redesign.

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.

Atmung – Standardisierte Checkliste macht Intubation von Neugeborenen sicherer

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (03) ◽  
pp. 124-125
Author(s):  
Maria Weiß
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Patient Safety ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care ◽  
Improve Patient Safety ◽  
Improve Patient

Hatch LD. et al. Intervention To Improve Patient Safety During Intubation in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. Pediatrics 2016; 138: e20160069 Kinder auf der Neugeborenen-Intensivstation sind besonders durch Komplikationen während des Krankenhausaufenthaltes gefährdet. Dies gilt auch für die Intubation, die relativ häufig mit unerwünschten Ereignissen einhergeht. US-amerikanische Neonatologen haben jetzt untersucht, durch welche Maßnahmen sich die Komplikationsrate bei Intubationen in ihrem Perinatal- Zentrum senken lässt.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document