How do hospital inpatients conceptualise patient safety? A qualitative interview study using constructivist grounded theory.

BACKGROUND: Efforts to involve patients in patient safety continue to revolve around professionally derived notions of minimising clinical risk, yet evidence suggests that patients hold perspectives on patient safety that are distinct from clinicians and academics. This study aims to understand how hospital inpatients across three different specialties conceptualise patient safety and develop a conceptual model that reflects their perspectives. METHODS: A qualitative semi-structured interview study was conducted with 24 inpatients across three clinical specialties (medicine for the elderly, elective surgery and maternity) at a large central London teaching hospital. An abbreviated form of constructivist grounded theory was employed to analyse interview transcripts. Constant comparative analysis and memo-writing using the clustering technique were used to develop a model of how patients conceptualise patient safety. RESULTS: While some patients described patient safety using terms consistent with clinical/academic definitions, patients predominantly conceptualised patient safety in the context of what made them 'feel safe'. Patients' feelings of safety arose from a range of care experiences involving specific actors: hospital staff, the patient, their friends/family/carers, and the healthcare organisation. Four types of experiences contributed to how patients conceptualise safety: actions observed by patients; actions received by patients; actions performed by patients themselves; and shared actions involving patients and other actors in their care. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the need for a patient safety paradigm that is meaningful to all stakeholders, incorporating what matters to patients to feel safe in hospital. Additional work should explore and test how the proposed conceptual model can be practically applied and implemented to incorporate the patient conceptualisation of patient safety into everyday clinical practice.

Cancer multidisciplinary team meetings: impact of logistical challenges on communication and decision-making.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are widely used in cancer care. Recent research points to logistical challenges impeding MDT decision-making and dissatisfaction among members. This study sought to identify different types of logistical issues and how they impacted team processes. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional observational study. Three cancer MDTs (breast, colorectal, and gynaecological) were recruited from UK hospitals. Validated observational instruments were used to measure decision-making (Metrics of Observational Decision-making, MDT-MODe), communication (Bales' Interaction Process Analysis, Bales' IPA), and case complexity (Measure of Case Discussion Complexity, MeDiC), including logistical challenges (Measure of Case Discussion Complexity, MeDiC), across 822 case discussions from 30 videoed meetings. Descriptive analysis and paired samples t tests were used to identify and compare frequency of different types of logistical challenges, along with partial correlations, controlling for clinical complexity of cases, to understand how such issues related to the MDT decision-making and communication. RESULTS: A significantly higher frequency of administrative and process issues (affecting 30 per cent of cases) was seen compared with the frequency of equipment issues (affecting 5 per cent of cases; P < 0.001) and the frequency of the attendance issues (affecting 16 per cent of cases; P < 0.001). The frequency of the attendance issues was significantly higher than the frequency of equipment issues (P < 0.001). Partial correlation analysis revealed that administrative and process issues, including attendance, were negatively correlated with quality of information (r = -0.15, P < 0.001; r = -0.11, P < 0.001), and equipment issues with the quality of contribution to meeting discussion (r = -0.14, P < 0.001). More questioning and answering by MDT members was evident with the administrative and process issues (r = 0.21, P < 0.001; r = 0.19, P < 0.001). Some differences were observed in teams' socioemotional reactions to the administrative and process issues with the gynaecological MDT showing positive correlation with positive socioemotional reactions (r = 0.20, P < 0.001), and the breast cancer MDT with negative socioemotional reactions (r = 0.17, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Administrative and process issues were the most frequent logistical challenges for the studied teams. Where diagnostic results were unavailable, and inadequate patient details provided, the quality of decision-making was reduced.

Perceptions on the Use of Wearable Sensors and Continuous Monitoring in Surgical Patients: Interview Study Among Surgical Staff.

BACKGROUND: Continuous vital sign monitoring by using wearable sensors may result in the earlier detection of patient deterioration and sepsis. Few studies have explored the perspectives of surgical team members on the use of such sensors in surgical patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to understand the views of surgical team members regarding novel wearable sensors for surgical patients. METHODS: Wearable sensors that monitor vital signs (heart rate, respiratory rate, and temperature) continuously were used by acute surgical patients. The opinions of surgical staff who were treating patients with these sensors were collated through in-depth semistructured interviews to thematic saturation. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed via thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 48 interviews were performed with senior and junior surgeons and senior and junior nurses. The main themes of interest that emerged from the interviews were (1) problems with current monitoring, (2) the anticipated impact of wearables on patient safety, (3) the impact on staff, (4) the impact on patients overall, (5) potential new changes, and (6) the future and views on technology. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the feedback from staff who were continuously monitoring surgical patients via wearable sensors was positive, and relatively few concerns were raised. Surgical staff members identify problems with current monitoring and anticipate that sensors will both improve patient safety and be the future of monitoring.

Short-Term Wearable Sensors for In-Hospital Medical and Surgical Patients: Mixed Methods Analysis of Patient Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Continuous vital sign monitoring using wearable sensors may enable early detection of patient deterioration and sepsis. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore patient experiences with wearable sensor technology and carry out continuous monitoring through questionnaire and interview studies in an acute hospital setting. METHODS: Patients were recruited for a wearable sensor study and were asked to complete a 9-item questionnaire. Patients responses were evaluated using a Likert scale and with continuous variables. A subgroup of surgical patients wearing a Sensium Vital Sign Sensor was invited to participate in semistructured interviews. The Sensium wearable sensor measures the vital signs: heart rate, respiratory rate, and temperature. All interview data were subjected to thematic analysis. RESULTS: Out of a total of 500 patients, 453 (90.6%) completed the questionnaire. Furthermore, 427 (85.4%) patients agreed that the wearable sensor was comfortable, 429 (85.8%) patients agreed to wear the patch again when in hospital, and 398 (79.6%) patients agreed to wear the patch at home. Overall, 12 surgical patients consented to the interviews. Five main themes of interest to patients emerged from the interviews: (1) centralized monitoring, (2) enhanced feelings of patient safety, (3) impact on nursing staff, (4) comfort and usability, and (5) future use and views on technology. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the feedback from patients using wearable monitoring sensors was strongly positive with relatively few concerns raised. Patients felt that the wearable sensors would improve their sense of safety, relieve pressure on health care staff, and serve as a favorable aspect of future health care technology.

A multicentre cross-sectional observational study of cancer multidisciplinary teams: Analysis of team decision making.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary teams (MDT) formulate expert informed treatment recommendations for people with cancer. We set out to examine how the factors proposed by the functional perspective of group decision making (DM), that is, interaction process, internal factors (factors emanating from within the group such as group size), external circumstances (factors coming from the outside of the team), and case-complexity affect the quality of MDT decision making. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional observational study. Three cancer MDTs were recruited with 44 members overall and 30 of their weekly meetings filmed. Validated observational instruments were used to measure quality of DM, interactions, and complexity of 822 case discussions. RESULTS: The full regression model with the variables proposed by the functional perspective was significant, R2  = 0.52, F(20, 801) = 43.47, P < .001, adjusted R2  = 0.51. Positive predictors of DM quality were asking questions (P = .001), providing answers (P = .001), team size (P = .007), gender balance (P = .003), and clinical complexity (P = .001), while negative socioemotional reactions (P = .007), gender imbalance (P = .003), logistical issues (P = .001), time-workload pressures (P = .002), and time spent in the meeting (P = .001) were negative predictors. Second half of the meetings also saw significant decrease in the DM quality (P = .001), interactions (P = .001), group size (P = .003), and clinical complexity (P = .001), and an increase in negative socioemotional reactions (P = .001) and time-workload pressures (P = .001). DISCUSSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to attempt to assess the factors proposed by the functional perspective in cancer MDTs. One novel finding is the effect of sociocognitive factors on team DM quality, while another is the cognitive-catch 22 effect: while the case discussions are significantly simpler in the second half of the meeting, there is significantly less time left to discuss the remaining cases, further adding to the cognitive taxation in teams who are now rapidly attempting to close their time-workload gap. Implications are discussed in relation to quality and safety.

A measure of case complexity for streamlining workflow in multidisciplinary tumor boards: Mixed methods development and early validation of the MeDiC tool.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is increasing emphasis in cancer care globally for care to be reviewed and managed by multidisciplinary teams (ie, in tumor boards). Evidence and recommendations suggest that the complexity of each patient case needs to be considered as care is planned; however, no tool currently exists for cancer teams to do so. We report the development and early validation of such a tool. METHODS: We used a mixed-methods approach involving psychometric evaluation and expert review to develop the Measure of case-Discussion Complexity (MeDiC) between May 2014 and November 2016. The study ran in six phases and included ethnographic interviews, observations, surveys, feasibility and reliability testing, expert consensus, and multiple expert-team reviews. RESULTS: Phase-1: case complexity factors identified through literature review and expert interviews; Phase-2: 51 factors subjected to iterative review and content validation by nine cancer teams across four England Trusts with nine further items identified; Phase 3: 60 items subjected to expert review distilled to the most relevant; Phase 4: item weighing and further content validation through a national UK survey; Phases 5 and 6: excellent interassessor reliability between clinical and nonclinical observers, and adequate validity on 903 video case discussions achieved. A final set of 27 factors, measuring clinical and logistical complexities were integrated into MeDiC. CONCLUSIONS: MeDiC is an evidence-based and expert-driven tool that gauges the complexity of cancer cases. MeDiC may be used as a clinical quality assurance and screening tool for tumor board consideration through case selection and prioritization.

Using Fully-Immersive Simulation Training with Structured Debrief to Improve Nontechnical Skills in Emergency Endovascular Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Assess whether fully-immersive simulation training with structured debriefing of a standardized emergency thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) scenario improves team-work performance of the lead surgeon. Secondary aims: assess whether technical skills (TS) and radiation safety behaviors (RSB) improved concurrently. DESIGN: Pre-post study. SETTING: UK-based training days. PARTICIPANTS: General and vascular surgical trainees (n = 16). INTERVENTION(S): Fully-immersive simulation training with structured debriefing of a standardized emergency TEVAR scenario. Following standardized emergency TEVAR technical training, trainees led 2 standardized fully-immersive endovascular surgery simulations, with scripted support from a passive surgical team. A non-TS (NTS) structured debrief was delivered following simulations. NTS were assessed using the validated observational teamwork assessment for surgery tool post hoc using video recordings of simulations. TS were assessed through time taken to complete each step of the procedure, as defined during technical training. RSB were assessed through checking for presence of pre-defined actions and the length of time fluoroscopy was used during each simulation. RESULTS: Total observational teamwork assessment for surgery scores improved following structured debrief (p = 0.005, median 52.55/90 vs 73.0/90), alongside all constituent domains - communication (p < 0.001, median 11.7/20 vs 16.6/20), coordination (p < 0.001, median 8.6/15 vs 13.4/15), cooperation (p < 0.001, median 13.15/20 vs 16.35/20), leadership (p < 0.001, median 8.70/15 vs 11.30/15) and monitoring (p < 0.001, median 9.85/20 vs 14.85/20). TS improved; time to complete 12 of 13 procedural steps improved (p < 0.027). Fluoroscopy time (seconds) decreased (p = 0.339, 543.6 vs 495.5), frequency lead surgeons checked the team were wearing leads increased (p = 0.125, 3 vs 7) and asked the team to step back before screening increased (p = 0.003, frequency team asked to step back/total angiography runs before = 2/36 vs after = 14/44). CONCLUSIONS: fully-immersive endovascular simulation with structured debrief is a robust tool to improve NTS and TS. Incorporation into surgical training may reduce operating theatres errors, increase efficiency, and improve RSB. However effective translation into the clinical workplace must be demonstrated to see these benefits.

Understanding Patient Acceptance of Risk with Treatment Options for Intermittent Claudication.

BACKGROUND: Intermittent claudication has a major impact on the quality of life and functional ability of the patient. However, when treating these patients, management is largely influenced by vascular surgeons' perceptions of risk. There is little information available regarding the level of risk that patients perceive to be acceptable, when considering complications of treatment. This study investigates patients' acceptance of risk associated with current management options for intermittent claudication and explores factors associated with greater risk acceptance. METHODS: Patients with confirmed intermittent claudication presenting to vascular clinic and supervised exercise classes were surveyed in a single-center prospective study. A standard gamble-type method was used to measure patients' acceptance of risk associated with medical treatment, angioplasty, and surgical bypass. Level of risk acceptance was correlated to patient factors. RESULTS: Fifty patients were surveyed; 74% were male, median age was 68 years (interquartile range [IQR] 59-74), maximal walking distance was 100 m (IQR 70-200), and ankle-brachial pressure index was 0.65 (IQR 0.60-0.78). Median risk acceptance for treatment failure was 70% for medical treatment, 50% for angioplasty, and 40% for surgical bypass. Median risk acceptance for major amputation and death was 0% for all 3 management options. Claudicants with maximal walking distance <100 m accepted higher risk of treatment failure (P = 0.0005 for medical treatment, P = 0.0038 for angioplasty), and death with medical treatment (P = 0.0009). There was no significance between claudication distance and risk acceptance of major amputation with any treatment modality or death with angioplasty or surgical bypass. There was no significant correlation among level of risk acceptance and age, gender, or diabetic status. CONCLUSIONS: Claudicants are prepared to accept significant risk of treatment failure, in order to gain benefit, but regardless of claudication distance, patients have low acceptance of the risk of amputation or death. Patient acceptance of risk should be considered when planning management.

Emergency revascularisation in a patient with acute mesenteric ischaemia: the role of open revascularisation and compensatory blood flow.

PURPOSE: This case highlights the importance of timely diagnosis and management of acute mesenteric ischaemia and illustrates the compensatory mechanisms of the mesenteric vasculature. CASE REPORT: A 53-year-old female presented with fever, abdominal pain, and vomiting. The patient had no risk factors for atherosclerosis and was a non-smoker in sinus rhythm with no history of coagulopathy. She was initially treated for viral gastroenteritis. Due to lack of clinical improvement and a rising C-Reactive Protein (416), a CT scan was performed. This demonstrated small bowel ischaemia, chronic occlusion of the coeliac axis, and a long acute-on-chronic occlusion of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA). The length and morphology of the SMA occlusion precluded endovascular treatment. Emergency laparotomy demonstrated 1 m of necrotic small bowel and a pulseless mesentery. An aorto-SMA bypass, using good-quality long saphenous vein was performed, with segmental small bowel resection. Postoperative nutritional support was required with discharge on the 23rd post-operative day. Interval surveillance confirmed graft patency. One year post-discharge, she presented to routine clinic with paroxysmal right iliac fossa pain and decreased appetite. CT angiography showed a long tight 75% stenosis of the graft and she was admitted for mesenteric angioplasty. Angiography confirmed a significantly hypertrophied inferior mesenteric artery, which was now the dominant mesenteric supply. CONCLUSIONS: This case demonstrates the importance of emergency mesenteric revascularisation and how it acts as a bridge to anatomical compensation, allowing the collateral circulation to develop and the IMA to hypertrophy, becoming the dominant mesenteric supply.

Patient Compliance with Surveillance Following Elective Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.

PURPOSE: Integral to maintaining good outcomes post-endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a robust surveillance protocol. A significant proportion of patients fail to comply with surveillance, exposing themselves to complications. We examine EVAR surveillance in Wessex (UK), exploring factors that may predict poor compliance. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 179 consecutive elective EVAR cases [2008-2013] was performed. 167 patients were male, with the age range of 50-95. Surveillance was conducted centrally (tertiary referral trauma centre) and at four spoke units. Surveillance compliance and predictors of non-compliance including age, gender, co-morbid status, residential location and socioeconomic status were analysed for univariate significance. RESULTS: Fifty patients (27.9 %) were non-compliant with surveillance; 14 (8.1 %) had no imaging post-EVAR. At 1 year, 56.1 % (of 123 patients) were compliant. At years 2 and 3, 41.5 and 41.2 % (of 65 and 34 patients, respectively) were compliant. Four years post-EVAR, only one of eight attended surveillance (12.5 %). There were no statistically significant differences in age (p = 0.77), co-morbid status or gender (p = 0.64). Distance to central unit (p = 0.67) and surveillance site (p = 0.56) was non-significant. While there was a trend towards compliance in upper-middle-class socioeconomic groups (ABC1 vs. C1C2D), correlating with >50 % of non-compliant patients living within <10 mile radius of the central unit, overall predictive value was not significant (p = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with surveillance post-EVAR is poor. No independent predictor of non-compliance has been confirmed, but socioeconomic status appears to be relevant. There is a worrying drop-off in attendance beyond the first year. This study highlights a problem that needs to be addressed urgently, if we are to maintain good outcomes post-EVAR.

Adverse Outcomes in Infantile Bilateral Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip.

BACKGROUND: It is believed that bilateral developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) has poorer outcomes with higher rates of avascular necrosis (AVN) and reintervention, compared with unilateral DDH. However, there is limited evidence in the literature, with few studies looking specifically at bilateral cases. METHODS: A retrospective review of 36 patients (72 hips) with >4 years of follow-up. Patient population included surgically treated DDH including late presentations and failures of conservative treatment. The dislocated hips underwent either simultaneous closed or 1 open and 1 closed, or sequential open reduction. AVN and secondary procedures were used as endpoints for analysis as well as clinical and radiologic outcomes. RESULTS: At the last follow-up, 33% of hips had radiologic signs of AVN. Those hips that had no ossific nucleus (ON) at the time of surgery had an odds ratio of developing AVN of 3.05 and a statistically significant association between the 2 variables, whereas open/closed or simultaneous/sequential reduction did not increase the risk for AVN. In addition, 45.8% of those hips required further surgery. The estimated odds ratio of needing additional surgery after simultaneous reduction was 4.04. Clinically, 79.2% of the hips were graded as McKay I, whereas radiologically only 38.8% were Severin I. CONCLUSIONS: The AVN rate in bilateral DDH treated surgically is greater than the rate noted in unilateral cases from the same institution undergoing identical protocols. There was no difference in AVN rates between simultaneous and sequential or between the first and second hip to be sequentially reduced. Presence of ON decreases the risk for AVN, suggesting that in bilateral cases, awaiting the appearance of the ON is an important tool to reduce the incidence of AVN. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Reducing error and improving efficiency during vascular interventional radiology: implementation of a preprocedural team rehearsal.

PURPOSE: To determine the type and frequency of errors during vascular interventional radiology (VIR) and design and implement an intervention to reduce error and improve efficiency in this setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ethical guidance was sought from the Research Services Department at Imperial College London. Informed consent was not obtained. Field notes were recorded during 55 VIR procedures by a single observer. Two blinded assessors identified failures from field notes and categorized them into one or more errors by using a 22-part classification system. The potential to cause harm, disruption to procedural flow, and preventability of each failure was determined. A preprocedural team rehearsal (PPTR) was then designed and implemented to target frequent preventable potential failures. Thirty-three procedures were observed subsequently to determine the efficacy of the PPTR. Nonparametric statistical analysis was used to determine the effect of intervention on potential failure rates, potential to cause harm and procedural flow disruption scores (Mann-Whitney U test), and number of preventable failures (Fisher exact test). RESULTS: Before intervention, 1197 potential failures were recorded, of which 54.6% were preventable. A total of 2040 errors were deemed to have occurred to produce these failures. Planning error (19.7%), staff absence (16.2%), equipment unavailability (12.2%), communication error (11.2%), and lack of safety consciousness (6.1%) were the most frequent errors, accounting for 65.4% of the total. After intervention, 352 potential failures were recorded. Classification resulted in 477 errors. Preventable failures decreased from 54.6% to 27.3% (P < .001) with implementation of PPTR. Potential failure rates per hour decreased from 18.8 to 9.2 (P < .001), with no increase in potential to cause harm or procedural flow disruption per failure. CONCLUSION: Failures during VIR procedures are largely because of ineffective planning, communication error, and equipment difficulties, rather than a result of technical or patient-related issues. Many of these potential failures are preventable. A PPTR is an effective means of targeting frequent preventable failures, reducing procedural delays and improving patient safety.

Lower-limb ischemia in the young patient: management strategies in an endovascular era.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this paper is to review the potential role of endovascular interventions for young patients with lower-limb ischaemia. METHODS: A literature search was performed of PubMed and Medline databases using appropriate search terms and limits. Case reports, retrospective studies, and prospective studies evaluating treatment of lower-limb ischemia in patients aged <50 years were scrutinized. Articles published between 1966 and 2010 were included in this review. RESULTS: Premature atherosclerosis is likely to represent the commonest cause of lower-limb ischemia in patients aged <50 years, although the incidence of nonatherosclerotic causes such as popliteal entrapment syndrome, cystic adventitial disease, and arteritis in these patients is greater than in older patients. As with older patients, endovascular interventions may be beneficial for patients with symptoms secondary to atherosclerosis. At present, the perceived durability of open surgery may be more preferable to patients aged <50 years, but the development of new endovascular technology is challenging this view. Endovascular interventions such as catheter-directed thrombolysis have specific roles in the treatment of lower-limb ischemia due to nonatherosclerotic causes. CONCLUSION: The use of angioplasty and stenting procedures to treat young patients with lower-limb ischemia is increasing and has specific roles. However, many developmental causes and nonatherosclerotic conditions still require primary surgical correction.