Improving Patient Safety in Public Hospitals: Developing Standard Measures to Track Medical Errors and Process Breakdowns.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to develop standards for tracking patient safety gaps in ambulatory care in safety net health systems. METHODS: Leaders from five California safety net health systems were invited to participate in a modified Delphi process sponsored by the Safety Promotion Action Research and Knowledge Network (SPARKNet) and the California Safety Net Institute in 2016. During each of the three Delphi rounds, the feasibility and validity of 13 proposed patient safety measures were discussed and prioritized. Surveys and transcripts from the meetings were analyzed to understand the decision-making process. RESULTS: The Delphi process included eight panelists. Consensus was reached to adopt 9 of 13 proposed measures. All 9 measures were unanimously considered valid, but concern was expressed about the feasibility of implementing several of the measures. CONCLUSIONS: Although safety net health systems face high barriers to standardized measurement, our study demonstrates that consensus can be reached on acceptable and feasible methods for tracking patient safety gaps in safety net health systems. If accompanied by the active participation key stakeholder groups, including patients, clinicians, staff, data system professionals, and health system leaders, the consensus measures reported here represent one step toward improving ambulatory patient safety in safety net health systems.

Innovative Implementation Studies Conducted in US Safety Net Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.

Little is known about dissemination and implementation in safety net settings. The authors conducted a literature review of innovation/implementation studies in US safety net health care settings between 2008 and 2017. Each article was coded for (1) intervention characteristics, (2) implementation stage, (3) internal versus external ownership, and (4) prespecified implementation outcomes (eg, acceptability and fidelity). Twenty studies were identified; the majority were implemented within community clinics or integrated safety net systems (15 articles), most involved care process improvements (13 articles), and most were internally developed (13 articles). The internally developed innovations reported fewer barriers to acceptability among staff/providers, higher leadership involvement and organizational alignment, greater amounts of customization to the local setting, and better sustainment. Future work should harness the high levels of alignment and acceptability in implementation research within safety net settings, with an eye toward maintaining fidelity to facilitate dissemination across sites.

Redesigning primary care in the safety net: A qualitative analysis of team-based care implementation.

BACKGROUND: Team-based care is an innovative approach to primary care in which groups of health care professionals work collaboratively to manage care for groups of patients. Safety-net organizations face specific barriers to implementing health care innovations. More research is needed that documents the dynamics that inform implementation and sustainment of innovative practices in the safety net. METHODS: We conducted qualitative fieldwork, including purposeful observation and semi-structured and informal interviews, to explore the implementation of care teams in safety-net clinics in California. Field notes and transcripts were analyzed using an inductive approach to identify overarching themes across sites. RESULTS: Salient themes across clinics suggest that 1) well-designed physical layouts that promote sustained patterns of structured and spontaneous communication and collaboration are critical to creating high-functioning teams; 2) implementation of team-based care relies on a relaxing of the traditional clinic hierarchy into an agile organizational structure that empowers all clinic staff-most notably medical assistants-by facilitating an ethos of collaborative decision-making, interdependence, and shared responsibility; and 3) resource constraints related to recruitment and retention of qualified staff are key barriers to implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Team-based care has the potential to improve patient outcomes, strengthen relationships and well-being among clinic staff, and expand staff roles to facilitate collective accomplishment of work goals. To successfully launch and sustain care teams in safety-net clinics, greater commitments to creating well-designed spaces and a re-envisioning of the training and compensation for medical assistants that reflects the valuable role these individuals can play appear to be necessary.

Accurate Measurement In California's Safety-Net Health Systems Has Gaps And Barriers.

Patient safety in ambulatory care has not been routinely measured. California implemented a pay-for-performance program in safety-net hospitals that incentivized measurement and improvement in key areas of ambulatory safety: referral completion, medication safety, and test follow-up. We present two years of program data (collected during July 2015-June 2017) and show both suboptimal performance in aspects of ambulatory safety and questionable reliability in data reporting. Performance was better in areas that required limited coordination or patient engagement-for example, annual medication monitoring versus follow-up after high-risk mammograms. Health care systems that lack seamlessly integrated electronic health records and patient registries encountered barriers to reporting reliable ambulatory safety data, particularly for measures that integrated multiple data elements. These data challenges precluded accurate performance measurement in many areas. Policy makers and safety advocates need to support the development of information systems and measures that facilitate the accurate ascertainment of the health systems, patients, and clinical tasks at greatest risk for ambulatory safety failures.

Safety-net institutions in the US grapple with new cholesterol treatment guidelines: a qualitative analysis from the PHoENIX Network.

BACKGROUND: Clinical performance measures, such as for cholesterol control targets, have played an integral role in assessing the value of care and translating evidence into clinical practice. New guidelines often require development of corresponding performance metrics and systems changes that can be especially challenging in safety-net health care institutions. Understanding how public health care institutions respond to changing practice guidelines may be critical to informing how we adopt evolving evidence in clinical settings that care for the most vulnerable populations. METHODS: We conducted six focus groups with representatives of California's 21 public hospital systems to examine their reactions to the recent 2013 cholesterol treatment guideline. RESULTS: Participants reported a sense of confusion and lack of direction in implementing the new guideline. They cited organizational and data infrastructural inadequacies that made implementation of the new guidelines impractical in their clinical settings. CONCLUSION: Adopting new performance measures to align with evolving cholesterol guidelines is a complex process that may work at odds with existing quality improvement priorities. Current efforts to translate evidence into practice may rely too much on performance measures and not enough on building capacity or support for innovative efforts to meet the goals of guidelines.

Performance Measurement and Target-Setting in California's Safety Net Health Systems.

Health policies encourage implementing quality measurement with performance targets. The 2010-2015 California Medicaid waiver mandated quality measurement and reporting. In 2013, California safety net hospitals participating in the waiver set a voluntary performance target (the 90th percentile for Medicare preferred provider organization plans) for mammography screening and cholesterol control in diabetes. They did not reach the target, and the difference-in-differences analysis suggested that there was no difference for mammography ( P = .39) and low-density lipoprotein control ( P = .11) performance compared to measures for which no statewide quality improvement initiative existed. California's Medicaid waiver was associated with improved performance on a number of metrics, but this performance was not attributable to target setting on specific health conditions. Performance may have improved because of secular trends or systems improvements related to waiver funding. Relying on condition-specific targets to measure performance may underestimate improvements and disadvantage certain health systems. Achieving ambitious targets likely requires sustained fiscal, management, and workforce investments.

Efficiency, Efficacy, and Power in the Implementation of a Medication Adherence Aid.

Nonadherence to medication regimens is common, with approximately 50% of patients not taking their medications as prescribed. The Universal Medication Schedule (UMS) is a set of standardized, evidence-based, and patient-centered instructions for pill-form medications that has demonstrated improvements in adherence by promoting patient comprehension. An urban, publicly funded, integrated health care system attempted to adopt UMS labeling but had limited success at its largest pilot site, which was a safety-net health care system's outpatient pharmacy. To assess barriers to implementation, we engaged pharmacists at this site in group interviews. We thematically analyzed transcripts by integrating sociological work on standardization with grounded theory methodologies. In addition to lacking technological infrastructure, tensions among efficiency, efficacy, and effectiveness, and tension between individual/biomedical versus population health perspectives emerged as barriers to implementation. Additionally, we discovered that hierarchies of professional power impeded uptake. For successful implementation of evidence-based practices for vulnerable populations in resource-poor settings, efforts must anticipate and reconcile the tensions among conflicting demands, professional hierarchies, and divergent orientations to patient care. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2018;2(3):e128-e131.].

Meaningful use in the safety net: a rapid ethnography of patient portal implementation at five community health centers in California.

OBJECTIVE: US health care institutions are implementing secure websites (patient portals) to achieve federal Meaningful Use (MU) certification. We sought to understand efforts to implement portals in "safety net" health care systems that provide services for low-income populations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our rapid ethnography involved visits at 4 California safety net health systems and in-depth interviews at a fifth. Visits included interviews with clinicians and executives ( n = 12), informal focus groups with front-line staff ( n = 35), observations of patient portal sign-up procedures and clinic work, review of marketing materials and portal use data, and a brief survey ( n = 45). RESULTS: Our findings demonstrate that the health systems devoted considerable effort to enlisting staff support for portal adoption and integrating portal-related work into clinic routines. Although all health systems had achieved, or were close to achieving, MU benchmarks, patients faced numerous barriers to portal use and our participants were uncertain how to achieve and sustain "meaningful use" as defined by and for their patients. DISCUSSION: Health systems' efforts to achieve MU certification united clinic staff under a shared ethos of improved quality of care. However, MU's assumptions about patients' demand for electronic access to health information and ability to make use of it directed clinics' attention to enrollment and message routing rather than to the relevance and usability of a tool that is minimally adaptable to the safety net context. CONCLUSION: We found a mismatch between MU-based metrics of patient engagement and the priorities and needs of safety net patient populations.

Understanding the barriers to successful adoption and use of a mobile health information system in a community health center in São Paulo, Brazil: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Mobile technology to support community health has surged in popularity, yet few studies have systematically examined usability of mobile platforms for this setting. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study of 14 community healthcare workers at a public healthcare clinic in São Paulo, Brazil. We held focus groups with community healthcare workers to elicit their ideas about a mobile health application and used this input to build a prototype app. A pre-use test survey was administered to all participants, who subsequently use-tested the app on three different devices (iPhone, iPad mini, iPad Air). Usability was assessed by objectively scored data entry errors and through a post-use focus group held to gather open-ended feedback on end-user satisfaction. RESULTS: All of the participants were women, ranging from 18-64 years old. A large percentage (85.7%) of participants had at least a high school education. Internet (92.8%), computer (85.7%) and cell phone (71.4%) use rates were high. Data entry error rates were also high, particularly in free text fields, ranging from 92.3 to 100%. Error rates were comparable across device type. In a post-use focus group, participants reported that they found the app easy to use and felt that its design was consistent with their vision. The participants raised several concerns, including that they did not find filling out the forms in the app to be a useful task. They also were concerned about an app potentially creating more work for them and personal security issues related to carrying a mobile device in low-income areas. CONCLUSION: In a cohort of formally educated community healthcare workers with high levels of personal computer and cell phone use, we identified no technological barriers to adapting their existing work to a mobile device based system. Transferring current data entry work into a mobile platform, however, uncovered underlying dissatisfaction with some data entry tasks. This dissatisfaction may be a more significant barrier than the data entry errors our testing revealed. Our results highlight the fact that without a deep understanding of local process to optimize usability, technology-based solutions in health may fail. Developing such an understanding must be a central component in the design of any mHealth solution in global health.

Usability of Commercially Available Mobile Applications for Diverse Patients.

BACKGROUND: Mobile applications or 'apps' intended to help people manage their health and chronic conditions are widespread and gaining in popularity. However, little is known about their acceptability and usability for low-income, racially/ethnically diverse populations who experience a disproportionate burden of chronic disease and its complications. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the usability of existing mobile health applications ("apps") for diabetes, depression, and caregiving, in order to facilitate development and tailoring of patient-facing apps for diverse populations. DESIGN: Usability testing, a mixed-methods approach that includes interviewing and direct observation of participant technology use, was conducted with participants (n = 9 caregivers; n = 10 patients with depression; and n = 10 patients with diabetes) on a total of 11 of the most popular health apps (four diabetes apps, four depression apps, and three caregiver apps) on both iPad and Android tablets. PARTICIPANTS: The participants were diverse: 15 (58 %) African Americans, seven (27 %) Whites, two (8 %) Asians, two (8 %) Latinos with either diabetes, depression, or who were caregivers. MAIN MEASURES: Participants were given condition-specific tasks, such as entering a blood glucose value into a diabetes app. Participant interviews were video recorded and were coded using standard methods to evaluate attempts and completions of tasks. We performed inductive coding of participant comments to identify emergent themes. KEY RESULTS: Participants completed 79 of 185 (43 %) tasks across 11 apps without assistance. Three themes emerged from participant comments: lack of confidence with technology, frustration with design features and navigation, and interest in having technology to support their self-management. CONCLUSIONS: App developers should employ participatory design strategies in order to have an impact on chronic conditions such as diabetes and depression that disproportionately affect vulnerable populations. While patients express interest in using technologies for self-management, current tools are not consistently usable for diverse patients.

Online public reactions to frequency of diagnostic errors in US outpatient care.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic errors pose a significant threat to patient safety but little is known about public perceptions of diagnostic errors. A study published in BMJ Quality & Safety in 2014 estimated that diagnostic errors affect at least 5% of US adults (or 12 million) per year. We sought to explore online public reactions to media reports on the reported frequency of diagnostic errors in the US adult population. METHODS: We searched the World Wide Web for any news article reporting findings from the study. We then gathered all the online comments made in response to the news articles to evaluate public reaction to the newly reported diagnostic error frequency (n=241). Two coders conducted content analyses of the comments and an experienced qualitative researcher resolved differences. RESULTS: Overall, there were few comments made regarding the frequency of diagnostic errors. However, in response to the media coverage, 44 commenters shared personal experiences of diagnostic errors. Additionally, commentary centered on diagnosis-related quality of care as affected by two emergent categories: (1) US health care providers (n=79; 63 commenters) and (2) US health care reform-related policies, most commonly the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and insurance/reimbursement issues (n=62; 47 commenters). CONCLUSION: The public appears to have substantial concerns about the impact of the ACA and other reform initiatives on the diagnosis-related quality of care. However, policy discussions on diagnostic errors are largely absent from the current national conversation on improving quality and safety. Because outpatient diagnostic errors have emerged as a major safety concern, researchers and policymakers should consider evaluating the effects of policy and practice changes on diagnostic accuracy.

Qualitative analysis of programmatic initiatives to text patients with mobile devices in resource-limited health systems.

BACKGROUND: Text messaging is an affordable, ubiquitous, and expanding mobile communication technology. However, safety net health systems in the United States that provide more care to uninsured and low-income patients may face additional financial and infrastructural challenges in utilizing this technology. Formative evaluations of texting implementation experiences are limited. We interviewed safety net health systems piloting texting initiatives to study facilitators and barriers to real-world implementation. METHODS: We conducted telephone interviews with various stakeholders who volunteered from each of the eight California-based safety net systems that received external funding to pilot a texting-based program of their choosing to serve a primary care need. We developed a semi-structured interview guide based partly on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), which encompasses several domains: the intervention, individuals involved, contextual factors, and implementation process. We inductively and deductively (using CFIR) coded transcripts, and categorized themes into facilitators and barriers. RESULTS: We performed eight interviews (one interview per pilot site). Five sites had no prior texting experience. Sites applied texting for programs related to medication adherence and monitoring, appointment reminders, care coordination, and health education and promotion. No site texted patient-identifying health information, and most sites manually obtained informed consent from each participating patient. Facilitators of implementation included perceived enthusiasm from patients, staff and management belief that texting is patient-centered, and the early identification of potential barriers through peer collaboration among grantees. Navigating government regulations that protect patient privacy and guide the handling of protected health information emerged as a crucial barrier. A related technical challenge in five sites was the labor-intensive tracking and documenting of texting communications due to an inability to integrate texting platforms with electronic health records. CONCLUSIONS: Despite enthusiasm for the texting programs from the involved individuals and organizations, inadequate data management capabilities and unclear privacy and security regulations for mobile health technology slowed the initial implementation and limited the clinical use of texting in the safety net and scope of pilots. Future implementation work and research should investigate how different texting platform and intervention designs affect efficacy, as well as explore issues that may affect sustainability and the scalability.