The evolution of patient-reported safety concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic within a series of study questionnaires: a multi-method analysis.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Isobel Joy McFadzean, Muslim Bilal, Kate Davies, Delyth Price, Thomas Purchase, Anna Torrens-Burton, Denitza Williams, Rhiannon Phillips, Andrew Carson-Stevens, Natalie Joseph-Williams
{"title":"The evolution of patient-reported safety concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic within a series of study questionnaires: a multi-method analysis.","authors":"Isobel Joy McFadzean, Muslim Bilal, Kate Davies, Delyth Price, Thomas Purchase, Anna Torrens-Burton, Denitza Williams, Rhiannon Phillips, Andrew Carson-Stevens, Natalie Joseph-Williams","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzaf040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic had a profound impact on healthcare systems globally, with the potential to aggravate levels of healthcare-associated harm. Due to radical changes within service provision, this period was considered likely to influence patient-reported safety concerns. We aimed to characterise the nature of these safety concerns at different time periods after the first UK lockdown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A patient-reported safety concerns module was included within the UK COVID-19 Public Experience (COPE) study surveys at three time points: March/April 2021, September/November 2021, and March/April 2022. Participants were asked whether they had experienced any safety concerns whilst using healthcare services during the previous six months, the nature of the concern(s), and to provide a free-text response to describe it. Free-text data were reviewed to identify reports that met the National Health Service (NHS) definition of a patient safety incident. Descriptive analysis was undertaken to identify incident type, contributory factors, and patient outcomes, followed by thematic analysis of the most frequently reported incidents.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from 11,604 completed questionnaires were screened over the three time points, and 1,363 (10.0%) participants reported a safety concern, and 722 (53%) concerns met the definition of a patient safety incident: 262/499 (53%) at 12 months; 215/456 (47.1%) at 18 months; and 245/408 (60.1%) at 24 months. The most frequently reported safety incidents involved access to healthcare professionals (12 months/18 months), and errors managing healthcare appointments (24 months). Prominence of themes fluctuated over time, as the context and policies that influenced the safety reports shifted. For example, geographical limitations on healthcare were evident at 12 months, mitigation from healthcare-associated harm by family members at 18 months, and concerns surrounding healthcare professional and other patient's behaviour at 24 months.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Healthcare organisations are undoubtedly still undergoing a protracted period of recovery. However, to protect health services from any further threats to functioning, organisations must review patient safety data systems and examine staff perspectives on the issues identified, notably in relation to infection control policies, social distancing, and patient access to health services. Learning from patient-reported experiences and considering how safety incidents are defined would support improvements in patient safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12510432/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzaf040","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had a profound impact on healthcare systems globally, with the potential to aggravate levels of healthcare-associated harm. Due to radical changes within service provision, this period was considered likely to influence patient-reported safety concerns. We aimed to characterise the nature of these safety concerns at different time periods after the first UK lockdown.

Methods: A patient-reported safety concerns module was included within the UK COVID-19 Public Experience (COPE) study surveys at three time points: March/April 2021, September/November 2021, and March/April 2022. Participants were asked whether they had experienced any safety concerns whilst using healthcare services during the previous six months, the nature of the concern(s), and to provide a free-text response to describe it. Free-text data were reviewed to identify reports that met the National Health Service (NHS) definition of a patient safety incident. Descriptive analysis was undertaken to identify incident type, contributory factors, and patient outcomes, followed by thematic analysis of the most frequently reported incidents.

Results: Data from 11,604 completed questionnaires were screened over the three time points, and 1,363 (10.0%) participants reported a safety concern, and 722 (53%) concerns met the definition of a patient safety incident: 262/499 (53%) at 12 months; 215/456 (47.1%) at 18 months; and 245/408 (60.1%) at 24 months. The most frequently reported safety incidents involved access to healthcare professionals (12 months/18 months), and errors managing healthcare appointments (24 months). Prominence of themes fluctuated over time, as the context and policies that influenced the safety reports shifted. For example, geographical limitations on healthcare were evident at 12 months, mitigation from healthcare-associated harm by family members at 18 months, and concerns surrounding healthcare professional and other patient's behaviour at 24 months.

Conclusion: Healthcare organisations are undoubtedly still undergoing a protracted period of recovery. However, to protect health services from any further threats to functioning, organisations must review patient safety data systems and examine staff perspectives on the issues identified, notably in relation to infection control policies, social distancing, and patient access to health services. Learning from patient-reported experiences and considering how safety incidents are defined would support improvements in patient safety.

在一系列研究问卷中,2019冠状病毒病大流行期间患者报告的安全问题的演变:多方法分析
背景:2019冠状病毒病大流行对全球卫生保健系统产生了深远影响,有可能加剧卫生保健相关危害的程度。由于服务提供的急剧变化,这一时期被认为可能影响患者报告的安全问题。我们的目的是在英国第一次封锁后的不同时期描述这些安全问题的性质。方法:在三个时间点(2021年3月/ 4月、2021年9月/ 11月和2022年3月/ 4月),将患者报告的安全问题模块纳入英国COVID-19公共经验(COPE)研究调查。参与者被问及他们在过去六个月使用医疗保健服务时是否遇到过任何安全问题,问题的性质,并提供自由文本回答来描述它。对自由文本数据进行审查,以确定符合国家卫生服务(NHS)对患者安全事件定义的报告。进行描述性分析以确定事件类型、促成因素和患者结局,然后对最常报告的事件进行专题分析。结果:在三个时间点筛选了13604份完整问卷的数据,1363名(10.0%)参与者报告了安全问题,722名(53%)的担忧符合患者安全事件的定义:12个月时262/499 (53%);18个月时215/456 (47.1%);24个月时为245/408(60.1%)。报告中最常见的安全事件涉及获得医疗保健专业人员(12个月/18个月)和管理医疗保健预约的错误(24个月)。随着影响安全报告的背景和政策的变化,主题的突出程度随着时间的推移而波动。例如,在12个月时,医疗保健方面的地理限制很明显;在18个月时,家庭成员减轻了与医疗保健有关的伤害;在24个月时,对医疗保健专业人员和其他患者行为的担忧。结论:医疗保健机构无疑仍在经历一个漫长的恢复期。然而,为了保护卫生服务免受任何进一步的功能威胁,组织必须审查患者安全数据系统,并审查工作人员对所确定问题的看法,特别是与感染控制政策、社会距离和患者获得卫生服务有关的问题。从患者报告的经验中学习,并考虑如何定义安全事件,将有助于改善患者安全。
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
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
3.80%
发文量
87
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal for Quality in Health Care makes activities and research related to quality and safety in health care available to a worldwide readership. The Journal publishes papers in all disciplines related to the quality and safety of health care, including health services research, health care evaluation, technology assessment, health economics, utilization review, cost containment, and nursing care research, as well as clinical research related to quality of care. This peer-reviewed journal is truly interdisciplinary and includes contributions from representatives of all health professions such as doctors, nurses, quality assurance professionals, managers, politicians, social workers, and therapists, as well as researchers from health-related backgrounds.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信