BMJ quality & safety
-
BMJ quality & safety · Dec 2015
Observational StudyExpanding the scope of Critical Care Rapid Response Teams: a feasible approach to identify adverse events. A prospective observational cohort.
Adverse events (AEs) affect 3-12% of hospitalised patients. These are estimates from a labour-intensive chart review process,which is not feasible outside research. Clinical deterioration on the wards triggers a rapid response teams (RRTs) consult and can be used to identify an AE prospectively. ⋯ Reviewing RRT consults identified a high proportion of AEs and preventable AEs. This methodology detected twice as many AEs as the hospital's safety reporting system. RRT clinicians provide a complementary and more sensitive mechanism than traditional safety reporting systems to identify possible AEs in hospitals.
-
BMJ quality & safety · Dec 2015
ReviewA quality improvement project to improve early sepsis care in the emergency department.
Sepsis causes substantial morbidity and mortality in hospitalised patients. Although many studies describe the use of protocols in the management of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, few have addressed emergency department (ED) screening and management for patients initially presenting with uncomplicated sepsis (ie, patients without organ failure or hypotension). ⋯ The new protocol demonstrates that early screening interventions can lead to expedited delivery of care to patients with sepsis in the ED and could serve as a model for other facilities. Mortality was not significantly improved by our intervention, which included patients with uncomplicated sepsis.
-
BMJ quality & safety · Dec 2015
ReviewBarriers and facilitators related to the implementation of surgical safety checklists: a systematic review of the qualitative evidence.
The objective of this review is to obtain a better understanding of the user-related barriers against, and facilitators for, the implementation of surgical safety checklists. ⋯ The complex reality in which the checklist needs to be implemented requires an approach that includes more than eliminating barriers and supporting facilitating factors. Implementation leaders must facilitate team learning to foster the mutual understanding of perspectives and motivations, and the realignment of routines. This paper provides a pragmatic overview of the user-related barriers and facilitators upon which theories, hypothesising potential change strategies and interactions, can be developed and tested empirically.