A note on versions:The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the 'permanent WRAP url' above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription.

A note on versions:The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the 'permanent WRAP url' above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription.For more information, please contact the WRAP Team at: wrap@warwick.ac.uk ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P TResearch Highlights: Experience-based analysis of opportunities and challenges for using HRA in health  Considers reliability, performance variability, regulator, and patient role  HRA should have clinical engagement and patient participation  HRA cost-effectiveness should be rigorously evaluated  HRA can provide requisite imagination and build social safety infrastructure Abstract: Safety in healthcare is a relatively recent field, but has received considerable attention over the past 15 years. Healthcare organisations have been encouraged to learn from safety management practices in other industries. In this paper we analyse opportunities and challenges for the application of Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) in healthcare. We consider the poor levels of reliability of many healthcare processes, performance variability, the absence of regulatory frameworks that incentivise proactive risk management, and the unique role of the patient. We conclude that HRA could provide a useful framework for the analysis and reduction of risk in healthcare, but techniques might have to be adapted and applied with due consideration of the specifics of the cultural and regulatory context of this domain. This includes clinical engagement with and ownership of the HRA process, greater focus on rigorous evaluation of costeffectiveness of HRA techniques, and active involvement of patients.

Background: Primary care transformation in Scotland aims to improve population health, reduce health inequalities and reduce GP workload. Two key strategies (formalised in April 2018 in the new Scottish GP contract though started in early 2016) are the expansion of the multidisciplinary team (MDT) and GP cluster working. Aim: To explore progress in the implementation of the GP contract in Scotland in terms of MDT and cluster working. Design and Setting: Qualitative study with key national primary care stakeholders (PCSs) (n=6) and Cluster Quality Leads (CQLs) in clusters serving urban high deprivation areas (n=4), urban mixed areas (n=4), and remote and rural areas (n=4). Methods: Semi-structured interviews with thematic analysis. Results: There was general support for the initial aims of the new GP contract but all interviewees felt that progress on both MDT expansion and cluster working was slow, even prior to the pandemic. None of the CQLs (and few PCSs) felt that GP workload had reduced significantly, nor that the care of patients with complex needs had improved. Lack of time and poorly developed relationships were key barriers, as was a lack of relevant primary care data, and additional support (including guidance, administration, training, and protected time). Conclusion: Key PCSs and CQLs in different areas of Scotland report limited progress in primary care transformation, only partly related to the pandemic. There is a need for better workforce planning and support if the new GP contract is to succeed in transforming primary care in Scotland.

BackgroundIntensive care treatment can be life-saving, but it is invasive and distressing for patients receiving it and it is not always successful. Deciding whether or not a patient will benefit from intensive care is a difficult clinical and ethical challenge.ObjectivesTo explore the decision-making process for referral and admission to the intensive care unit and to develop and test an intervention to improve it.MethodsA mixed-methods study comprising (1) two systematic reviews investigating the factors associated with decisions to admit patients to the intensive care unit and the experiences of clinicians, patients and families; (2) observation of decisions and interviews with intensive care unit doctors, referring doctors, and patients and families in six NHS trusts in the Midlands, UK; (3) a choice experiment survey distributed to UK intensive care unit consultants and critical care outreach nurses, eliciting their preferences for factors used in decision-making for intensive care unit admission; (4) development of a decision-support intervention informed by the previous work streams, including an ethical framework for decision-making and supporting referral and decision-support forms and patient and family information leaflets. Implementation feasibility was tested in three NHS trusts; (5) development and testing of a tool to evaluate the ethical quality of decision-making related to intensive care unit admission, based on the assessment of patient records. The tool was tested for inter-rater and intersite reliability in 120 patient records.ResultsInfluences on decision-making identified in the systematic review and ethnographic study included age, presence of chronic illness, functional status, presence of a do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation order, referring specialty, referrer seniority and intensive care unit bed availability. Intensive care unit doctors used a gestalt assessment of the patient when making decisions. The choice experiment showed that age was the most important factor in consultants’ and critical care outreach nurses’ preferences for admission. The ethnographic study illuminated the complexity of the decision-making process, and the importance of interprofessional relationships and good communication between teams and with patients and families. Doctors found it difficult to articulate and balance the benefits and burdens of intensive care unit treatment for a patient. There was low uptake of the decision-support intervention, although doctors who used it noted that it improved articulation of reasons for decisions and communication with patients.LimitationsLimitations existed in each of the component studies; for example, we had difficulty recruiting patients and families in our qualitative work. However, the project benefited from a mixed-method approach that mitigated the potential limitations of the component studies.ConclusionsDecision-making surrounding referral and admission to the intensive care unit is complex. This study has provided evidence and resources to help clinicians and organisations aiming to improve the decision-making for and, ultimately, the care of critically ill patients.Future workFurther research is needed into decision-making practices, particularly in how best to engage with patients and families during the decision process. The development and evaluation of training for clinicians involved in these decisions should be a priority for future work.Study registrationThe systematic reviews of this study are registered as PROSPERO CRD42016039054, CRD42015019711 and CRD42015019714.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme. The University of Aberdeen and the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates fund the Health Economics Research Unit.

Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor (IMT) can occur rarely in the soft tissue or joint of the limb. We retrospectively collected IMT cases of these rare sites and analyzed their clinical and imaging appearance. Thirteen cases of IMT were clinically diagnosed and underwent surgical procedures, pathological analyses, and postsurgical follow-up in our two hospitals. Other than one case of IMT of the bladder wall that presented with gross hematuria, none presented with local swelling, fever, or weakness. All the cases of IMT occurring at the bone showed destruction and parosteal soft tissue masses. The boundaries between the mass and normal bone were vague, without calcifications or any periosteal reaction. Five cases of IMF showed continuous enhancement on CT; seven cases demonstrated iso- or hyposignal intensity on T1WI; one case showed hypersignal intensity on T1WI, and eight cases demonstrated a hypersignal intensity signal on T2WI. All the masses located in soft tissues showed clear and sharp boundaries with different sizes of the swelling regions surrounding muscle interspaces. Three cases showed homogeneous enhancement, one case demonstrated heterogeneous enhancement, and two cases showed edge enhancement on enhanced MRI scans. On pathology, all the lesions showed an absence of a pseudocapsule, and four cases of ALK were positive. The radiological manifestations of IMT located at the soft tissue and bones were similar to benign tumors in shape; however, peritumoral edema, parosteal soft tissue, and the invasive rim of IMT are similar to the features of malignant tumors. Different radiological methods should be used to obtain an accurate diagnosis.