• Evert de Jonge, Jeroen Ludikhuize, Sophia E de Rooij, Susanne M Smorenburg, and Miranda Gans-Langelaar.
• Department of Quality Assurance and Process Innovation, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. j.ludikhuize@amc.nl
• Crit. Care Med.. 2012 Nov 1;40(11):2982-6.

ObjectiveTo describe how nurses and physicians judge their own quality of care for deteriorating patients on medical wards compared with the judgment of independent experts.DesignCross-sectional study using interviews of care-providers regarding their perceived quality of care for clinically deteriorating patients compared with retrospective judgment by independent experts.SettingAcademic Medical Center of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.PatientsBetween April and July 2009, all patients with cardiopulmonary arrests and unplanned intensive care unit admissions from six medical nursing wards were included. The care-providers (nurses and physicians) taking care of these patients in the previous 12 hrs were included.Measurements And Main ResultsForty-seven events and 198 interviews were analyzed. Skill and knowledge level regarding the recognition of a deteriorating patient were rated on a scale of 1-10 with means (SD) of 7.9 (0.8) and 7.7 (0.9), respectively. Nurses and residents attributed coordination of care largely to themselves (74% and 76%, respectively). Communication, cooperation, and coordination were graded in a positive manner (medians between 7.3 and 8), whereas the medical staff graded these factors higher compared to the grading by nurses and residents. Negative predictive values regarding the presence of a delay compared with an expert panel was 37% for nurses and 38% for residents and specialists.ConclusionsCare-providers mostly rate their care provided to patients in the hours preceding a life-threatening adverse event as good. In contrast, independent experts had a more critical appraisal of the provided care in regards to timely recognition. These findings may partly explain the reluctance of care-providers to implement patient safety initiatives.

20 keywords...

hide…