Supporting Error Management and Safety Climate in Ambulatory Care Practices: The CIRSforte Study.

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of Patient Safety Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-12 DOI:10.1097/PTS.0000000000001225
Beate S Müller, Dagmar Lüttel, Dania Schütze, Tatjana Blazejewski, Marina Pommée, Hardy Müller, Katharina Rubin, Christian Thomeczek, Romy Schadewitz, Reiner Heuzeroth, David Schwappach, Corina Güthlin, Michael Paulitsch, Ferdinand M Gerlach
{"title":"Supporting Error Management and Safety Climate in Ambulatory Care Practices: The CIRSforte Study.","authors":"Beate S Müller, Dagmar Lüttel, Dania Schütze, Tatjana Blazejewski, Marina Pommée, Hardy Müller, Katharina Rubin, Christian Thomeczek, Romy Schadewitz, Reiner Heuzeroth, David Schwappach, Corina Güthlin, Michael Paulitsch, Ferdinand M Gerlach","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To improve patient safety, it is important that healthcare facilities learn from critical incidents. Tools such as reporting and learning systems and team meetings structure error management and promote learning from incidents. To enhance error management in ambulatory care practices, it is important to promote a climate of safety and ensure personnel share views on safety policies and procedures. In contrast to the hospital sector, little research has been dedicated to developing feasible approaches to supporting error management and safety climate in ambulatory care. In this study, we developed, implemented, and evaluated a multicomponent intervention to address how error management and safety climate can be improved in ambulatory care practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a prospective 1-group pretest-posttest implementation study, we sought to encourage teams in German ambulatory practices to use proven methods such as guidelines, workshops, e-learning, (online) meetings, and e-mail newsletters. A pretest-posttest questionnaire was used to evaluate level and strength of safety climate and psychological behavioral determinants for systematic error management. Using 3 short surveys, we also assessed the state of error management in the participating practices. In semistructured interviews, we asked participants for their views on our intervention measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 184 ambulatory care practices nationwide agreed to participate. Level of safety climate and safety climate strength (rwg) improved significantly. Of psychological behavioral determinants, significant improvements could be seen in \"action/coping planning\" and \"action control.\" Seventy-six percent of practices implemented a new reporting and learning system or modified their existing system. The exchange of information between practices also increased over time. Interviews showed that the introductory workshop and provided materials such as report forms or instructions for team meetings were regarded as helpful.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A significant improvement in safety climate level and strength, as well as participants' knowledge of how to analyze critical incidents, derive preventive measures and develop concrete plans suggest that it is important to train practice teams, to provide practical tips and tools, and to facilitate the exchange of information between practices. Future randomized and controlled intervention trials should confirm the effectiveness of our multicomponent intervention.Trial registration: Retrospectively registered on 18. November 2019 in German Clinical Trials Register No. DRKS00019053.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"314-322"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000001225","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To improve patient safety, it is important that healthcare facilities learn from critical incidents. Tools such as reporting and learning systems and team meetings structure error management and promote learning from incidents. To enhance error management in ambulatory care practices, it is important to promote a climate of safety and ensure personnel share views on safety policies and procedures. In contrast to the hospital sector, little research has been dedicated to developing feasible approaches to supporting error management and safety climate in ambulatory care. In this study, we developed, implemented, and evaluated a multicomponent intervention to address how error management and safety climate can be improved in ambulatory care practices.

Methods: In a prospective 1-group pretest-posttest implementation study, we sought to encourage teams in German ambulatory practices to use proven methods such as guidelines, workshops, e-learning, (online) meetings, and e-mail newsletters. A pretest-posttest questionnaire was used to evaluate level and strength of safety climate and psychological behavioral determinants for systematic error management. Using 3 short surveys, we also assessed the state of error management in the participating practices. In semistructured interviews, we asked participants for their views on our intervention measures.

Results: Overall, 184 ambulatory care practices nationwide agreed to participate. Level of safety climate and safety climate strength (rwg) improved significantly. Of psychological behavioral determinants, significant improvements could be seen in "action/coping planning" and "action control." Seventy-six percent of practices implemented a new reporting and learning system or modified their existing system. The exchange of information between practices also increased over time. Interviews showed that the introductory workshop and provided materials such as report forms or instructions for team meetings were regarded as helpful.

Conclusions: A significant improvement in safety climate level and strength, as well as participants' knowledge of how to analyze critical incidents, derive preventive measures and develop concrete plans suggest that it is important to train practice teams, to provide practical tips and tools, and to facilitate the exchange of information between practices. Future randomized and controlled intervention trials should confirm the effectiveness of our multicomponent intervention.Trial registration: Retrospectively registered on 18. November 2019 in German Clinical Trials Register No. DRKS00019053.

支持非住院医疗机构的错误管理和安全氛围:CIRSforte 研究。
背景:为了提高患者安全,医疗机构必须从重大事故中吸取教训。报告和学习系统以及团队会议等工具可构建差错管理并促进从事故中学习。要加强非住院医疗实践中的差错管理,就必须促进安全氛围的形成,并确保工作人员就安全政策和程序交换意见。与医院行业相比,很少有研究致力于开发可行的方法来支持非住院医疗中的差错管理和安全氛围。在这项研究中,我们开发、实施并评估了一项多成分干预措施,以解决如何改善非住院医疗实践中的差错管理和安全氛围的问题:在一项前瞻性的 1 组前测后测实施研究中,我们试图鼓励德国非住院医疗实践中的团队采用指南、研讨会、电子学习、(在线)会议和电子邮件通讯等行之有效的方法。我们采用了前测-后测问卷来评估系统性差错管理的安全氛围和心理行为决定因素的水平和强度。我们还使用 3 份简短的调查问卷评估了参与实践中的差错管理状况。在半结构化访谈中,我们询问了参与者对干预措施的看法:全国共有 184 家门诊医疗机构同意参与。安全氛围水平和安全氛围强度(rwg)显著提高。在心理行为决定因素中,"行动/应对计划 "和 "行动控制 "有明显改善。76% 的医疗机构实施了新的报告和学习系统或修改了现有系统。随着时间的推移,实践机构之间的信息交流也在增加。访谈显示,介绍性研讨会和提供的材料(如报告表格或团队会议说明)被认为很有帮助:安全氛围水平和强度的明显改善,以及参与者对如何分析重大事故、得出预防措施和制定具体计划的了解,都表明对实践团队进行培训、提供实用技巧和工具以及促进实践之间的信息交流非常重要。未来的随机对照干预试验应能证实我们的多成分干预措施的有效性:试验注册:回顾性注册于 18.2019年11月,德国临床试验注册号为 DRKS00019053。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Patient Safety
Journal of Patient Safety HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
13.60%
发文量
302
期刊介绍: Journal of Patient Safety (ISSN 1549-8417; online ISSN 1549-8425) is dedicated to presenting research advances and field applications in every area of patient safety. While Journal of Patient Safety has a research emphasis, it also publishes articles describing near-miss opportunities, system modifications that are barriers to error, and the impact of regulatory changes on healthcare delivery. This mix of research and real-world findings makes Journal of Patient Safety a valuable resource across the breadth of health professions and from bench to bedside.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信