No abstract

Speaking up is an important communication strategy to prevent patient harm. The aim of this study was to examine speak up‐related behaviour and climate for the first time in psychiatric hospitals. A cross‐sectional survey was conducted among healthcare workers (HCWs) in six psychiatric hospitals with nine sites in Switzerland. Measures assessed speak up‐related behaviour with 11 items organized in three scales (the frequency of perceived safety concerns, the frequency of withholding voice, and the frequency of speaking up). Speak up‐related climate was assessed by 11 items organized in 3 subscales (psychological safety for speaking up, encouraging environment for speaking up, and resignation). Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, reliability, correlations and multiple regression analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and analysis of variance for comparing mean scores between professional groups. A total of 817 questionnaires were completed (response rate: 23%). In different items, 45%–65% of HCWs reported perceived safety concerns at least once during the past four weeks. Withholding voice was reported by 13–25% of HCWs, and speaking up was reported by 53%–72% of HCWs. Systematic differences in scores were found between professional groups (nurses, doctors, psychologists) and hierarchical groups (lower vs higher status). The vignette showed that hierarchical level and perceived risk of harm for the patient were significant predictors for the self‐reported likelihood to speak up. Situations triggering safety concerns occur frequently in psychiatric hospitals. Speaking up and voicing concerns should be further promoted as an important safety measure.

Indwelling urinary catheter management is a strong interprofessional domain and a shared responsibility. It is crucial that measures to raise awareness and to communicate new standards target both nurses and physicians and are discussed in interprofessional formats.This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.

Background and Aims: Patient safety incidents may be prevented if healthcare workers speak up to voice their concerns when they observe hazardous clinical situations. This study aims to investigate the frequency of speaking up and healthcare workers' perception of organizational climate in rehabilitation clinics.Methods: An online survey was conducted in five rehabilitation clinics. An existing survey instrument (Speaking Up About Patient Safety Questionnaire [SUPS-Q]) was adapted for this purpose. The instrument includes items on self-reported speak-uprelated behavior (perceived safety concerns, withholding voice, and speaking up), anticipated speak-up behavior, barriers to speaking up, and speak-up-related climate measures (psychological safety, encouraging environment, and resignation). Data analysis included descriptive statistics, one-way analysis of variance for differences between groups, multiple regression, and measures for validity and reliability of the scales.Results: Four hundred seventy-one individuals participated in the survey (response rate of 32%). In the 4 weeks preceding the survey, 81% of respondents had specific concerns about patient safety, 83% performed speak up and 41% remained silent in one or more instances. Expected differences between professional groups were confirmed, but surprisingly, we found no effect of hierarchical level on speaking up behavior and perception of the speak-up climate. Factors that most frequently prevented healthcare workers from speaking up were ineffectiveness (38%), presence of patients (26%), and unpredictability of the actor's reaction (25%). The psychometric evaluation of the adapted SUPS-Q showed acceptable results for validity and reliability.Conclusions: Healthcare workers in rehabilitation clinics frequently perceive safety concerns. The study underlines the importance of promoting a culture of safety and speaking up. The short survey instrument SUPS-Q can be used by rehabilitation clinics to initiate discussions related to facilitators and barriers to speaking up and to identify areas for improvement within the organization.

ObjectiveTo evaluate changes in staff perspectives towards indwelling urinary catheter (IUC) use after implementation of a 1-year quality improvement project.DesignRepeated cross-sectional survey at baseline (October 2016) and 12-month follow-up (October 2017).SettingSeven acute care hospitals in Switzerland.ParticipantsThe survey was targeted at all nursing and medical staff members working at the participating hospitals at the time of survey distribution. A total of 1579 staff members participated in the baseline survey (T0) (49% response rate) and 1527 participated in the follow-up survey (T1) (47% response rate).InterventionA multimodal intervention bundle, consisting of an evidence-based indication list, daily re-evaluation of ongoing catheter need and staff training, was implemented over the course of 9 months.Main outcome measuresStaff knowledge (15 items), perception of current practices and culture (scale 1–7), self-reported responsibilities (multiple-response question) and determinants of behaviour (scale 1–7) before and after implementation of the intervention bundle.ResultsThe mean number of correctly answered knowledge questions increased significantly between the two survey periods (T0: 10.4, T1: 11.0; p<0.001). Self-reported responsibilities with regard to IUC management by nurses and physicians changed only slightly over time. Perception of current practices and culture in regard to safe urinary catheter use increased significantly (T0: 5.3, T1: 5.5; p<0.001). Significant changes were also observed for determinants of behaviour (T0: 5.3, T1: 5.6; p<0.001).ConclusionWe found small but significant changes in staff perceptions after implementation of an evidence-based intervention bundle. Efforts now need to be targeted at sustaining and reinforcing these changes, so that restrictive use of IUCs becomes an integral part of the hospital culture.

Hintergrund: Die Reduktion von unerwünschten Arzneimittelereignissen bei Bewohnenden von Altersund Pflegeheimen ist ein zentrales Anliegen der Patientensicherheit. Ziel dieser Studie war es zu ermitteln, wie häufig ausgewählte Medikationsprozesse zur Erhöhung der Medikationssicherheit in Schweizer Pflegeheimen bereits umgesetzt werden und wie sich Heime, die diese Prozesse noch nicht umsetzen, durch organisationale Merkmale charakterisieren lassen. Methode: Querschnittstudie mittels Online-Befragung von Pflegedienstleitungen in Schweizer Altersund Pflegeheimen. Ergebnisse: Es nahmen 420 von 1525 eingeladenen Personen an der Befragung teil (Rücklaufquote: 27.5%). Davon gaben 65.0% an, dass in ihrer Einrichtung eine regelmäßige systematische Überprüfung der Medikation vorgesehen ist. In 9.5% der Pflegeheime wird eine Liste zur Identifikation von potenziell inadäquater Medikation eingesetzt und 6.7% der Heime haben einen standardisierten Prozess, um Nebenwirkungen von Medikamenten zu überwachen. 66.0% der teilnehmenden Heime setzen mindestens einen dieser Prozesse um, 34.0% setzen keinen der drei Prozesse um. Statistisch signifikante Unterschiede in der Umsetzung der Prozesse zeigten sich nach Standort des Pflegeheims, der Art des Dokumentationssystems für die Medikation, dem Arztmodell, der Anzahl externer Ärzte/Ärztinnen sowie dem Bezugskanal der Medikamente und der gesetzlichen Verpflichtung zur Zusammenarbeit mit Apothekern/Apothekerinnen. Keine Unterschiede zeigten sich nach Heimgröße. Schlussfolgerung: In Schweizer Alters-und Pflegeheimen sind zentrale sicherheitsrelevante Medikationsprozesse noch nicht flächendeckend umgesetzt. Besonders in Einrichtungen, in denen viele externe Belegärzte Bewohnende betreuen, ist die Umsetzung noch wenig fortgeschritten. Die organisationalen Merkmale müssen für eine erfolgreiche Implementierung von Verbesserungsmassnahmen berücksichtigt werden.

ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to develop quality standards reflecting minimal requirements for safe medication processes in nursing homes.DesignIn a first step, relevant key topics for safe medication processes were deducted from a systematic search for similar guidelines, prior work and discussions with experts. In a second step, the essential requirements for each key topic were specified and substantiated with a literature-based rationale. Subsequently, the requirements were evaluated with a piloted, two-round Delphi study.SettingNursing homes in Switzerland.ParticipantsInterprofessional panel of 25 experts from science and practice.Primary and secondary outcome measuresEach requirement was rated for its relevance for a safer and resident-oriented medication on a 9-point Likert-Scale based on the RAND/UCLA method. The requirements were considered relevant if, in the second round, the median relevance rating was ≥7 and the proportion of ratings ≥7 was ≥80%.ResultsFive key topics with a total of 87 requirements were elaborated and rated in the Delphi study. After the second round (response rate in both rounds 100%), 85 requirements fulfilled the predefined criteria and were therefore included in the final set of quality standards. The five key topics are: (I) ‘The medication is reviewed regularly and in defined situations’, (II) ‘The medication is reviewed in a structured manner’, (III) ‘The medication is monitored in a structured manner’, (IV) ‘All healthcare professionals are committed to an optimal interprofessional collaboration’ and (V) ‘Residents are actively involved in medication process’.ConclusionsWe developed normative quality standards for a safer and resident-oriented medication in Swiss nursing homes. Altogether, 85 requirements define the medication processes and the behaviour of healthcare professionals. A rigorous implementation may support nursing homes in taking a step towards safer and resident-oriented medication.

ObjectivesIn recent years, the involvement of pharmacy technicians in medication reconciliation has increasingly been investigated. The aim of this study was to assess the implications on professional roles and collaboration when a best possible medication history (BPMH) at admission is obtained by pharmacy technicians.DesignQualitative study with semistructured interviews. Data were analysed using a qualitative content analysis approach.SettingInternal medicine units in two mid-sized Swiss hospitals.Participants21 staff members working at the two sites (6 pharmacy technicians, 2 pharmacists, 6 nurses, 5 physician residents and 2 senior physicians).ResultsPharmacy technicians generally appreciated their new tasks in obtaining a BPMH. However, they also experienced challenges associated with their new role. Interviewees reported unease with direct patient interaction and challenges with integrating the new BPMH tasks into their regular daily duties. We found that pharmacists played a key role in the BPMH process, since they act as coaches for pharmacy technicians, transmit information to the physicians and reconcile preadmission medication lists with admission orders. Physicians stated that they benefitted from the delegation of administrative tasks to pharmacy technicians. Regarding the interprofessional collaboration, we found that pharmacy technicians in the study acted on a preliminary administrative level and did not become part of the larger treatment team. There was no direct interaction between pharmacy technicians and physicians, but rather, the supervising pharmacists acted as intermediaries.ConclusionThe tasks assumed by pharmacy technicians need to be clearly defined and fully integrated into existing processes. Engaging pharmacy technicians may generate new patient safety risks and inefficiencies due to process fragmentation. Communication and information flow at the interfaces between professional groups therefore need to be well organised. More research is needed to understand if and under which circumstances such a model can be efficient and contribute to improving medication safety.