ObjectivesTo review the empirical literature to identify the activities, time spent and engagement of hospital managers in quality of care.DesignA systematic review of the literature.MethodsA search was carried out on the databases MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO, EMBASE, HMIC. The search strategy covered three facets: management, quality of care and the hospital setting comprising medical subject headings and key terms. Reviewers screened 15 447 titles/abstracts and 423 full texts were checked against inclusion criteria. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed on 19 included articles.ResultsThe majority of studies were set in the USA and investigated Board/senior level management. The most common research designs were interviews and surveys on the perceptions of managerial quality and safety practices. Managerial activities comprised strategy, culture and data-centred activities, such as driving improvement culture and promotion of quality, strategy/goal setting and providing feedback. Significant positive associations with quality included compensation attached to quality, using quality improvement measures and having a Board quality committee. However, there is an inconsistency and inadequate employment of these conditions and actions across the sample hospitals.ConclusionsThere is some evidence that managers’ time spent and work can influence quality and safety clinical outcomes, processes and performance. However, there is a dearth of empirical studies, further weakened by a lack of objective outcome measures and little examination of actual actions undertaken. We present a model to summarise the conditions and activities that affect quality performance.

Safety in aviation has often been compared with safety in healthcare. Following a recent article in this journal, the UK government set up an Independent Patient Safety Investigation Service, to emulate a similar well-established body in aviation. On the basis of a detailed review of relevant publications that examine patient safety in the context of aviation practice, we have drawn up a table of comparative features and a conceptual framework for patient safety. Convergence and divergence of safety-related behaviours across aviation and healthcare were derived and documented. Key safety-related domains that emerged included Checklists, Training, Crew Resource Management, Sterile Cockpit, Investigation and Reporting of Incidents and Organisational Culture. We conclude that whilst healthcare has much to learn from aviation in certain key domains, the transfer of lessons from aviation to healthcare needs to be nuanced, with the specific characteristics and needs of healthcare borne in mind. On the basis of this review, it is recommended that healthcare should emulate aviation in its resourcing of staff who specialise in human factors and related psychological aspects of patient safety and staff wellbeing. Professional and post-qualification staff training could specifically include Cognitive Bias Avoidance Training, as this appears to play a key part in many errors relating to patient safety and staff wellbeing.

This study has presented what principle programme coordinators across 20 NHS organizations considered to be the key strategies to sustain their own improvement programme and its successes, during the supported phase of the programme and 1 year on. Recommendations are to consider these practical strategies in order to improve chances of maintaining changes and continuing a quality improvement programme beyond the formal cessation of the intervention.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundWhile immunization is one of the most effective and successful public health interventions, there are still up to 30,000 deaths in major developed economies each year due to vaccine-preventable diseases, almost all in adults. In the UK, despite comparatively high vaccination rates among ≧65 s (73%) and, to a lesser extent, at-risk ≤65 s (52%) in 2013/2014, over 10,000 excess deaths were reported the previous influenza season. Adult tetanus vaccines are not routinely recommended in the UK, but may be overly administered. Social influences and risk-perceptions of diseases and vaccines are known to affect vaccine uptake. We aimed to explore the socio-psychological factors that drive adult vaccination in the UK, specifically influenza and tetanus, and to evaluate whether these factors are comparable between vaccines.Methods20 in-depth, face-to-face interviews were conducted with members of the UK public who represented a range of socio-demographic characteristics associated with vaccination uptake. We employed qualitative interviewing approaches to reach a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing adult vaccination decisions. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data.ResultsParticipants were classified according to their vaccination status as regular, intermittent and non-vaccinators for influenza, and preventative, injury-led, mixed (both preventative and injury-led) and as non-vaccinators for tetanus. We present our finding around five overarching themes: 1) perceived health and health behaviors; 2) knowledge; 3) vaccination influences; 4) disease appraisal; and 5) vaccination appraisal.ConclusionThe uptake of influenza and tetanus vaccines was largely driven by participants' risk perception of these diseases. The tetanus vaccine is perceived as safe and sufficiently tested, whereas the changing composition of the influenza vaccine is a cause of uncertainty and distrust. To maximize the public health impact of adult vaccines, policy should be better translated into high vaccination rates through evidence-based implementation approaches.

If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections.

PurposeMedications are mostly taken in patients’ own homes, increasingly administered by carers, yet studies of medication safety have been largely conducted in the hospital setting. We aimed to review studies of how carers cause and/or prevent medication administration errors (MAEs) within the patient’s home; to identify types, prevalence and causes of these MAEs and any interventions to prevent them.MethodsA narrative systematic review of literature published between 1 Jan 1946 and 23 Sep 2013 was carried out across the databases EMBASE, MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO, COCHRANE and CINAHL. Empirical studies were included where carers were responsible for preventing/causing MAEs in the home and standardised tools used for data extraction and quality assessment.ResultsThirty-six papers met the criteria for narrative review, 33 of which included parents caring for children, two predominantly comprised adult children and spouses caring for older parents/partners, and one focused on paid carers mostly looking after older adults. The carer administration error rate ranged from 1.9 to 33% of medications administered and from 12 to 92.7% of carers administering medication. These included dosage errors, omitted administration, wrong medication and wrong time or route of administration. Contributory factors included individual carer factors (e.g. carer age), environmental factors (e.g. storage), medication factors (e.g. number of medicines), prescription communication factors (e.g. comprehensibility of instructions), psychosocial factors (e.g. carer-to-carer communication), and care-recipient factors (e.g. recipient age). The few interventions effective in preventing MAEs involved carer training and tailored equipment.ConclusionThis review shows that home medication administration errors made by carers are a potentially serious patient safety issue. Carers made similar errors to those made by professionals in other contexts and a wide variety of contributory factors were identified. The home care setting should be a priority for the development of patient safety interventions.