What could cognitive capital mean for China's children?

Cognitive capital is an emerging paradigm that captures the criticality of investing in children whilst neural proliferation and development of brain architecture are at their peak. Distinct from financial capital, cognitive capital represents investment in future human potential from interventions in nutrition, health, education, child protection, and social welfare systems that optimize brain development. The return on investment is significant given the plasticity of the developing brain in response to positive stimuli. Investment in brain development results in improved health and well-being, educational outcomes, skills, employment, and quality of life. The inverse is also true. Negative stimuli lead to depreciating cognitive capital, poorer mental and physical health and educational outcomes, and decreased life chances. Cognitive capital could be an organizing framework for China's next phase of development to ensure the building of a prosperous society. Through significant commitment from the government, China has seen remarkable improvements in under-five mortality, literacy rates, access to basic education, life expectancy, and gross domestic product in the past few decades as the result of an expansion of publicly funded social services. Yet, inequities remain within and across communities and regions. In 2015, China had a country ranking of 97 for gross national income per capita, highlighting remaining challenges across the whole population. Cognitive capital relies on a package of forward-looking policies that lead to equitable, efficient, and effective use of existing and future resources. This is consistent with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Investments in interventions that maximize optimal brain development in children, realize children's rights, and contribute to future economic growth, defined as "cognitive capital," represent a significant opportunity for improving children's lives, nation-building, and future economic growth in China.

A landscape analysis of universal health coverage for mothers and children in South Asia.

The United Nations made universal health coverage (UHC) a key health goal in 2012 and it is one of the Sustainable Development Goals' targets. This analysis focuses on UHC for mothers and children in the 8 countries of South Asia. A high level overview of coverage of selected maternal, newborn and child health services, equity, quality of care and financial risk protection is presented. Common barriers countries face in achieving UHC are discussed and solutions explored. In countries of South Asia, except Bhutan and Maldives, between 42% and 67% of spending on health comes from out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) and government expenditure does not align with political aspirations. Even where reported coverage of services is good, quality of care is often low and the poorest fare worst. There are strong examples of ongoing successes in countries such as Bhutan, the Maldives and Sri Lanka. Related to this success are factors such as lower OOPE and higher spending on health. To make progress in achieving UHC, financial and non-financial barriers to accessing and receiving high-quality healthcare need to be reduced, the amount of investment in essential health services needs to be increased and allocation of resources must disproportionately benefit the poorest.

Accelerating progress towards universal health coverage in Asia and Pacific: improving the future for women and children.

Universal health coverage generates significant health and economic benefits and enables governments to reduce inequity. Where universal health coverage has been implemented well, it can contribute to nation-building. This analysis reviews evidence from Asia and Pacific drawing out determinants of successful systems and barriers to progress with a focus on women and children. Access to healthcare is important for women and children and contributes to early childhood development. Universal health coverage is a political process from the start, and public financing is critical and directly related to more equitable health systems. Closing primary healthcare gaps should be the foundation of universal health coverage reforms. Recommendations for policy for national governments to improve universal health coverage are identified, including countries spending < 3% of gross domestic product in public expenditure on health committing to increasing funding by at least 0.3%/year to reach a minimum expenditure threshold of 3%.

Improving population health one person at a time? Accountable care organisations: perceptions of population health--a qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVE: This qualitative interview study explored perceptions of the phrases 'population health', 'public health' and 'community health'. SETTING: Accountable care organisations (ACOs), and public health or similar agencies in different parts of the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Purposive sample of 29 interviewees at four ACOs, and 10 interviewees at six public health or similar agencies. RESULTS: Interviewees working for ACOs most often viewed 'population health' as referring to a defined group of their organisation's patients, though a few applied the phrase to people living in a geographical area. In contrast, interviewees working for public health agencies were more likely to consider 'population health' from a geographical perspective. CONCLUSIONS: Conflating geographical population health with the health of ACOs' patients may divert attention and resources away from organisations that use non-medical means to improve the health of geographical populations. As ACOs battle to control costs of their population of patients, it would be more accurate to consider using a more specific phrase, such as 'population of attributed patients', to refer to ACOs' efforts to care for the health of their defined group of patients.

Accountable care organizations and clinical commissioning groups face an uncertain challenge for improving public health.

UNLABELLED: Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) in the United States of America (USA) and Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in the United Kingdom (UK) are newly proposed cross-organisational structures in health services both tasked with a role which includes improving public health. Although there are very significant differences between the UK and USA health systems, there appears to be some similar confusion as to how ACOs and CCGs will regard and address public or population health. This short perspective article gives an overview of ACOs in the USA and CCGs in the UK, with the underlying context of possible public health functions. It concludes by considering the challenges facing both countries and highlighting the opportunity for shared learning. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: this article was based on a research proposal prepared for the Commonwealth Fund's Harkness Fellowship in Health Care Policy and Practice 2012/2013.

A public health approach to patient safety reporting systems is urgently needed.

Patient safety reporting systems (PSRSs) currently operate at local, regional, and national levels within health care. This article analyzes 6 different PSRSs using a World Health Organization and public health classification system. Patient safety incidents (PSIs) are reported, analyzed, mitigated, and evaluated in a variety of different ways. This results in a reduced ability to accurately compare PSIs between different PSRSs, to monitor trends in PSIs, or to reliably translate and learn from information between any individual PSRS. By applying principles from basic public health research and infectious disease surveillance systems, these hurdles may be overcome and the full potential of PSRSs could be realized.

Can the surgical checklist reduce the risk of wrong site surgery in orthopaedics?--Can the checklist help? Supporting evidence from analysis of a national patient incident reporting system.

BACKGROUND: Surgical procedures are now very common, with estimates ranging from 4% of the general population having an operation per annum in economically-developing countries; this rising to 8% in economically-developed countries. Whilst these surgical procedures typically result in considerable improvements to health outcomes, it is increasingly appreciated that surgery is a high risk industry. Tools developed in the aviation industry are beginning to be used to minimise the risk of errors in surgery. One such tool is the World Health Organization's (WHO) surgery checklist. The National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA) manages the largest database of patient safety incidents (PSIs) in the world, already having received over three million reports of episodes of care that could or did result in iatrogenic harm. The aim of this study was to estimate how many incidents of wrong site surgery in orthopaedics that have been reported to the NPSA could have been prevented by the WHO surgical checklist. METHODS: The National Reporting and Learning Service (NRLS) database was searched between 1st January 2008- 31st December 2008 to identify all incidents classified as wrong site surgery in orthopaedics. These incidents were broken down into the different types of wrong site surgery. A Likert-scale from 1-5 was used to assess the preventability of these cases if the checklist was used. RESULTS: 133/316 (42%) incidents satisfied the inclusion criteria. A large proportion of cases, 183/316 were misclassified. Furthermore, there were fewer cases of actual harm [9% (12/133)] versus 'near-misses' [121/133 (91%)]. Subsequent analysis revealed a smaller proportion of 'near-misses' being prevented by the checklist than the proportion of incidents that resulted in actual harm; 18/121 [14.9% (95% CI 8.5-21.2%)] versus 10/12 [83.3% (95%CI 62.2-104.4%)] respectively. Summatively, the checklist could have been prevented 28/133 [21.1% (95%CI 14.1-28.0%)] patient safety incidents. DISCUSSION: Orthopaedic surgery is a high volume specialty with major technical complexity in terms of equipment demands and staff training and familiarity. There is therefore an increased propensity for errors to occur. Wrong-site surgery still occurs in this specialty and is a potentially devastating situation for both the patient and surgeon. Despite the limitations of inclusion and reporting bias, our study highlights the need to match technical precision with patient safety. Tools such as the WHO surgical checklist can help us to achieve this.

What has change management in industry got to do with improving patient safety?

BACKGROUND: Healthcare is often in a constant state of change - for political, technological, patient related, and scientific reasons. Yet, for a business where change is the norm, too little time is spent thinking theoretically about how change occurs. One area where change is still needed is in patient safety. METHODS: Presented is an analysis of the literature on change to suggest how this may inform patient safety. RESULTS: No one change approach guarantees success in patient safety. Success very much depends on selecting the best fit change framework and adapting it to local context. Well regarded change models, like that of Kotter, are not well tested within a healthcare context. Those that are, such as Pettigrew, do not specifically address all the issues associated with patient safety. Kotter's phases of change may be applied in a healthcare context to enhance patient safety. CONCLUSION: Kotter's model is well studied in non-healthcare contexts and has potential to be adapted for improving patient safety.

Republished paper: The quest to eliminate intrathecal vincristine errors: a 40-year journey.

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal administration of vincristine is a rare event but catastrophic for the patient, family and clinical team involved. Analysis of this source of harm shows it to be a classic systems error which has proved intractable for nearly 40 years. Failure to learn from history, communicate safety solutions nationally and internationally, create safety agencies which effectively and reliably prevent adverse events, conduct investigations and enquiries which fully reveals how to mitigate system error, develop robust physical design solutions to prevent harm to patients, make effective solutions universal and preparing for the unexpected are all major challenges. CONCLUSIONS: The elimination of rare yet catastrophic errors like this remains one of the tests of whether we can make healthcare safer. In this paper, we discuss why effective learning has been so slow and illustrate lessons for other fields of patient safety.

The quest to eliminate intrathecal vincristine errors: a 40-year journey.

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal administration of vincristine is a rare event but catastrophic for the patient, family and clinical team involved. Analysis of this source of harm shows it to be a classic systems error which has proved intractable for nearly 40 years. Failure to learn from history, communicate safety solutions nationally and internationally, create safety agencies which effectively and reliably prevent adverse events, conduct investigations and enquiries which fully reveals how to mitigate system error, develop robust physical design solutions to prevent harm to patients, make effective solutions universal and preparing for the unexpected are all major challenges. CONCLUSIONS: The elimination of rare yet catastrophic errors like this remains one of the tests of whether we can make healthcare safer. In this paper, we discuss why effective learning has been so slow and illustrate lessons for other fields of patient safety.

What have we learned about interventions to reduce medical errors?

Medical errors and adverse events are now recognized as major threats to both individual and public health worldwide. This review provides a broad perspective on major effective, established, or promising strategies to reduce medical errors and harm. Initiatives to improve safety can be conceptualized as a "safety onion" with layers of protection, depending on their degree of remove from the patient. Interventions discussed include those applied at the levels of the patient (patient engagement and disclosure), the caregiver (education, teamwork, and checklists), the local workplace (culture and workplace changes), and the system (information technology and incident reporting systems). Promising interventions include forcing functions, computerized prescriber order entry with decision support, checklists, standardized handoffs and simulation training. Many of the interventions described still lack strong evidence of benefit, but this should not hold back implementation. Rather, it should spur innovation accompanied by evaluation and publication to share the results.