Clinical risk最新文献_第6页

Clinical risk and integrated care: Lessons from Accountable Care Organisations in the United States 临床风险和综合护理:来自美国负责任医疗机构的经验教训

Clinical risk Pub Date : 2015-06-04 DOI: 10.1177/1356262215590049

N. Lennox-Chhugani, D. Horrigan, D. Stein, Aarushi Jain

引用次数: 1

What will the general election result mean for patient safety and justice? 大选结果对病人的安全和正义意味着什么?

Clinical risk Pub Date : 2015-03-01 DOI: 10.1177/1356262215592330

P. Walsh

引用次数: 0

BD v The Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust BD诉皇家伍尔弗汉普顿医院NHS信托基金

Clinical risk Pub Date : 2015-03-01 DOI: 10.1177/1356262215574782

A. Mellis

引用次数: 2

Do we know what we know – or just what we don’t know? 我们知道我们所知道的，还是我们所不知道的?

Clinical risk Pub Date : 2015-03-01 DOI: 10.1177/1356262215591767

H. Merrett

引用次数: 0

Addressing the Conundrum: the MCA or the MHA? 解决难题:MCA还是MHA?

Clinical risk Pub Date : 2015-03-01 DOI: 10.1177/1356262215577520

Oluwatoyin A Sorinmade, Alexander Ruck Keene, Lisa Moylan

引用次数: 1

First-year doctors’ attitudes and beliefs relating to quality improvement and patient safety 第一年医生对质量改进和患者安全的态度和信念

Clinical risk Pub Date : 2015-03-01 DOI: 10.1177/1356262215585270

M. Dahill, R. Bethune, A. Carson-Stevens, Eleanor Soo, K. Finucane, Joanne Watson, T. Woodhead, Clare VanHamel

{"title":"First-year doctors’ attitudes and beliefs relating to quality improvement and patient safety","authors":"M. Dahill, R. Bethune, A. Carson-Stevens, Eleanor Soo, K. Finucane, Joanne Watson, T. Woodhead, Clare VanHamel","doi":"10.1177/1356262215585270","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1356262215585270","url":null,"abstract":"In the current environment of culture change and financial pressure on the National Health Service, quality improvement initiatives are heralded as new vehicles for workplace evolution. Foundation Year One doctors encounter many of the problems impinging on quality, and their enthusiasm and number make them an indispensable resource and critical mass for improvement. In response to the increasing importance of quality improvement training, and as part of an ongoing project to embed quality improvement education in the Severn Deanery region, this paper describes the evolution of a questionnaire tool to assess the attitudes and beliefs of a cohort of new Foundation Year One doctors. An electronic survey was developed and validated to address each aim of quality care. The survey was sent by email to every Foundation Year One doctor in the Severn Deanery. New Foundation Year One doctors’ attitudes are overwhelmingly positive towards quality improvement and patient safety; however, universally, they do not feel valued and listened to. In addition, they do not feel that their previous medical education has fully equipped them to improve the quality and safety of the care they deliver to their patients. Foundation Year One doctors represent a large, intelligent and enthusiastic workforce and in an environment where quality is now accepted as paramount, harnessing their potential through better quality improvement training could prove advantageous to all National Health Service stakeholders.","PeriodicalId":89664,"journal":{"name":"Clinical risk","volume":"21 1","pages":"47 - 49"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1356262215585270","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65477209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Mother’s claim for Psychiatric Injury Fails:Gemma Powell v St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust (High Court, 10 December 2014 – Judge Simon Brown QC) 母亲精神伤害索赔失败:杰玛·鲍威尔诉圣乔治医疗保健NHS信托基金(高等法院，2014年12月10日- Simon Brown QC法官)

Clinical risk Pub Date : 2015-03-01 DOI: 10.1177/1356262215591765b

J. Mead

引用次数: 0

Claim from non-patient struck out: ABC v St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust, South West London and St George’s Mental Health NHS Trust and Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (High Court, 19 May 2015 – Nicol J) 非患者出局索赔:ABC诉伦敦西南部圣乔治医疗保健NHS信托基金和圣乔治精神健康NHS信托基金和苏塞克斯合作伙伴NHS基金会信托基金(高等法院，2015年5月19日- Nicol J)

Clinical risk Pub Date : 2015-03-01 DOI: 10.1177/1356262215591765

J. Mead

{"title":"Claim from non-patient struck out: ABC v St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust, South West London and St George’s Mental Health NHS Trust and Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (High Court, 19 May 2015 – Nicol J)","authors":"J. Mead","doi":"10.1177/1356262215591765","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1356262215591765","url":null,"abstract":"The trusts applied to strike out this claim on the basis that there was no reasonable prospect of the claimant establishing that it would be fair, just or reasonable to impose a duty of care in the circumstances. The judge made an anonymity order in relation to the claimant, her father and daughter but not in respect of the trusts involved. In 2007, the claimant’s father (F) shot and killed the claimant’s mother. He was convicted of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and detained at a clinic run by the second defendant. In 2009, it was suspected that he was suffering from Huntington’s disease and he was referred to St George’s Hospital, the responsibility of the first defendant. He had also been seen by a social worker employed by the third defendant. In November 2009, it was confirmed that F did indeed have Huntington’s disease. This disease is genetic in origin and, if a parent has it, there is a 50% chance that his or her child will do so too. Various health professionals therefore sought F’s consent to disclose the diagnosis to his daughter, the claimant, who was pregnant at the time. F refused permission. In January 2013, the claimant herself was diagnosed with the same condition but it was too early to tell whether her daughter (C) also had the disease.","PeriodicalId":89664,"journal":{"name":"Clinical risk","volume":"21 1","pages":"53 - 54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1356262215591765","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65477266","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

A comparison of the methods used to support risk identification for patient safety in one UK NHS foundation trust 用于支持患者安全风险识别在一个英国NHS基金会信托方法的比较

Clinical risk Pub Date : 2015-03-01 DOI: 10.1177/1356262215580224

M. Simsekler, Alan J. Card, K. Ruggeri, James R. Ward, P. Clarkson

{"title":"A comparison of the methods used to support risk identification for patient safety in one UK NHS foundation trust","authors":"M. Simsekler, Alan J. Card, K. Ruggeri, James R. Ward, P. Clarkson","doi":"10.1177/1356262215580224","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1356262215580224","url":null,"abstract":"In healthcare, various methods are available to support risk identification in risk management process. However, there is no clear evidence on their contribution to risk identification. In this study, different methods used to support risk identification were therefore analysed to compare their contribution to overall risk identification. The study was conducted at Cambridge University Hospitals Foundation Trust, UK. Three main methods were selected to compare their support in risk identification: incident reports through their Risk Management Information System, risk registers through their Risk Registers system, and safety walkabouts through their internal patient safety assessment process. Where possible, simple comparison tests were run between the different methods of identifying risks as well as by the type of risks identified. It was found that each method has contributed to the risk identification by adding different sets of risk sources despite some overlaps. However, they produced discrete assessments from different aspects and none of them, on its own, could produce adequate results for effective risk identification. In any healthcare setting, having a system to put all risk information in one picture would help maximise the contribution of each method within the scope risk management process. Future studies may benefit from broader use of multiple and system-based risk identification approaches, and coding methods for more powerful analytical test.","PeriodicalId":89664,"journal":{"name":"Clinical risk","volume":"21 1","pages":"37 - 46"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1356262215580224","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65476783","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 20

Insufficient evidence of negligence by gynaecologist: G v County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust (High Court, 30 July 2014 – Sir David Eady) 妇科医生疏忽的证据不足:G诉达勒姆郡和达灵顿NHS基金会信托基金(高等法院，2014年7月30日-大卫·伊迪爵士)

Clinical risk Pub Date : 2015-03-01 DOI: 10.1177/1356262215591765a

J. Mead

{"title":"Insufficient evidence of negligence by gynaecologist: G v County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust (High Court, 30 July 2014 – Sir David Eady)","authors":"J. Mead","doi":"10.1177/1356262215591765a","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1356262215591765a","url":null,"abstract":"some bearing on the killing. Although the conviction of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility implied acceptance that F was, at least in 2007, suffering from a disease of the mind, that did not mean that he lacked capacity to give or withhold his consent to his daughter being told of the diagnosis. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 states that a person is assumed to have capacity until the contrary is established. Capacity is to be determined by issue. Although the claimant pleaded that she was undergoing family therapy with the defendants, the court was not persuaded that this significantly affected the viability of her case. None of the defendants were obliged to disclose to some family members information, which they held under a duty of confidence to another family member. The duty of care which the claimant was trying to construct was entirely novel. On the other hand, the defendants pointed to authorities which strongly suggested that no such duty would be owed. For example, in D v East Berkshire NHS Trust [2005] 2 AC 373, the House of Lords dismissed claims from parents wrongly suspected of child abuse in situations where their children were the patients. This was not a case where the claimant could show that a novel duty of care would be but an incremental development from some well-established duty. It would, on the contrary, be a radical departure to impose liability in circumstances such as these. The submission that there was a special relationship between the defendants and the claimant would be rejected. Cumulatively, the defendants’ submissions provided a formidable argument as to why it would not be fair, just or reasonable to find a duty of care of the type for which the claimant contended. While there had been numerous judicial warnings about the caution which must be exercised before striking out a claim at the pleadings stage, if it was plain and certain that the pleaded facts did not disclose a reasonable cause of action, it was to the advantage of all concerned that the claim should not proceed to what would be a costly but inevitably fruitless trial. The court had reached the clear conclusion that this was how the claimant’s cause of action in negligence should be described. The claim was bound to fail and should be struck out. The claimant had added a claim under the Human Rights Act (Article 8 – right to respect for private and family life) as an afterthought. The trusts argued that even assuming Article 8 was engaged, any interference would plainly be justified under Article 8 (2). For all the reasons set out in the context of the common law claim, the balance came down decisively against the claimant. The convention did not assist her. It followed that the application to strike out was successful. Elizabeth-Anne Gumbel QC and Henry Witcomb (instructed by Field Fisher) appeared for the claimant. Philip Havers QC (instructed by Capsticks) appeared for the defendants.","PeriodicalId":89664,"journal":{"name":"Clinical risk","volume":"21 1","pages":"54 - 56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1356262215591765a","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65477310","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0