Explore the vast range of titles available.

A wide variety of research studies suggest that breakdowns in the diagnostic process result in a staggering toll of harm and patient deaths. These include autopsy studies, case reviews, surveys of patient and physicians, voluntary reporting systems, using standardised patients, second reviews, diagnostic testing audits and closed claims reviews. Although these different approaches provide important information and unique insights regarding diagnostic errors, each has limitations and none is well suited to establishing the incidence of diagnostic error in actual practice, or the aggregate rate of error and harm. We argue that being able to measure the incidence of diagnostic error is essential to enable research studies on diagnostic error, and to initiate quality improvement projects aimed at reducing the risk of error and harm. Three approaches appear most promising in this regard: (1) using ‘trigger tools’ to identify from electronic health records cases at high risk for diagnostic error; (2) using standardised patients (secret shoppers) to study the rate of error in practice; (3) encouraging both patients and physicians to voluntarily report errors they encounter, and facilitating this process.

Public and patient involvement (PPI) is increasingly recognised as essential in health research, service development and clinical audit. However, while Irish national guidance encourages PPI in audit, there is limited evidence on how to implement it meaningfully in maternity care. The PARTICIPATE Project aims to address this gap by exploring awareness and barriers to PPI in maternity clinical audits in Ireland, co-creating accessible resources to support engagement, and establishing sustainable PPI panels for ongoing collaboration with a national clinical audit centre. This mixed-methods study is led by the National Perinatal Epidemiology Centre and informed by participatory principles and international models such as the ENGAGE Project. The study is structured into three phases. Phase 1 consists of a national online survey exploring public awareness, interest, and perceived barriers to engagement in maternity clinical audit. In Phase 2, co-design sessions will be conducted with members of the public and service users to develop practical, user-informed resources to support future PPI activities. Phase 3 involves the creation of PPI panels to contribute to audit and research activities within the audit centre. Data collection and analysis will follow ethical standards, with support from the PARTICIPATE Project Advisory Group. This project will generate practical guidance on how to embed PPI in maternity clinical audit in a feasible and meaningful way. The focus on co-produced resources and long-term engagement structures aims to support more inclusive clinical audit practices and reinforce public confidence in the maternity care system. An advisory group, including individuals with lived experience and expertise in maternity care and PPI has informed the development of the study protocol and survey so far. Public and patient contributors will also co-produce project resources and be invited to participate in long-term advisory panels. All contributors will be acknowledged in project outputs and publications.

Background Rehabilitation programmes are used to improve hip fracture outcomes. There is little published trial clinical trial or population-based data on the effects of the type or provider of rehabilitation treatments on hip fracture outcomes. We evaluated the associations of rehabilitation interventions with post-operative hip fracture outcomes. Methods Cross-sectional (2013–2015) analysis of data from the English National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) from all 191 English hospitals treating hip fractures. Of 62,844 NHFD patients, we included 17,708 patients with rehabilitation treatment and 30-day mobility data, and 34,142 patients with rehabilitation treatment and discharge destination data. The intervention was early mobilisation rehabilitation treatments delivered by a physiotherapist (PT, physical therapist in North America) or other clinical staff as identifiable in NHFD. We used ordinal logistic and propensity scoring regression models to adjust for confounding variables including age, sex, pre-fracture mobility, operative delay, and cognitive function and peri-operative risk scores. Results In both the adjusted multivariate and propensity-weighted analyses, mobilisation on the day or the day following surgery is associated with better mobility function 30 days after discharge. However patients mobilised by a PT did not have better mobility compared to mobilisation by other professionals. Patients who received a PT assessment were not protected from poorer mobility 30 days after discharge, compared with those who did not receive an assessment. The discharge destination outcome is also better in mobilised than unmobilised patients, whether done by a PT or another health professional, and the difference persists, slightly attenuated, after propensity weighting. Conclusions In addition to the type of health professional initiating mobilisation, data on rehabilitation treatment activity and post-operative gait speed is needed to determine optimum rehabilitation dosage and functional outcome. After adjustment patients mobilised by non-PTs did as well as patients mobilised by PTs, suggesting that PTs’ current roles in very early rehabilitation should be reconsidered, with a view to redeploying them to more specialised later rehabilitation activity.

Background Substantial resources are invested by Health Departments worldwide in introducing National Clinical Audits (NCAs). Yet, there is variable evidence on the NCAs’ effectiveness and little is known on factors underlying the successful use of NCAs to improve local practice. This study will focus on a single NCA (the National Audit of Inpatient Falls -NAIF 2017) to explore: (i) participants’ perspectives on the NCA reports, local feedback characteristics and actions undertaken following the feedback underpinning the effective use of the NCA feedback to improve local practice; (ii) reported changes in local practice following the NCA feedback in England and Wales. Methods Front-line staff perspectives were gathered through interviews. An inductive qualitative approach was used. Eighteen participants were purposefully sampled from 7 of the 85 participating hospitals in England and Wales. Analysis was guided by constant comparative techniques. Results Regarding the NAIF annual report, interviewees valued performance benchmarking with other hospitals, the use of visual representations and the inclusion of case studies and recommendations. Participants stated that feedback should target front-line healthcare professionals, be straightforward and focused, and be delivered through an encouraging and honest discussion. Interviewees highlighted the value of using other relevant data sources alongside NAIF feedback and the importance of continuous data monitoring. Participants reported that engagement of front-line staff in the NAIF and following improvement activities was critical. Leadership, ownership, management support and communication at different organisational levels were perceived as enablers, while staffing level and turnover, and poor quality improvement (QI) skills, were perceived as barriers to improvement. Reported changes in practice included increased awareness and attention to patient safety issues and greater involvement of patients and staff in falls prevention activities. Conclusions There is scope to improve the use of NCAs by front-line staff. NCAs should not be seen as isolated interventions but should be fully embedded and integrated into the QI strategic and operational plans of NHS trusts. The use of NCAs could be optimised, but knowledge of them is poor and distributed unevenly across different disciplines. More research is needed to provide guidance on key elements to consider throughout the whole improvement process at different organisational levels.

Background User-centered design (UCD) methods are well-established techniques for creating useful artifacts, but few studies illustrate their application to clinical feedback reports. When used as an implementation strategy, the content of feedback reports depends on a foundational audit process involving performance measures and data, but these important relationships have not been adequately described. Better guidance on UCD methods for designing feedback reports is needed. Our objective is to describe the feedback report design method for refining the content of prototype reports. Methods We propose a three-step feedback report design method (refinement of measures, data, and display). The three steps follow dependencies such that refinement of measures can require changes to data, which in turn may require changes to the display. We believe this method can be used effectively with a broad range of UCD techniques. Results We illustrate the three-step method as used in implementation of goals of care conversations in long-term care settings in the U.S. Veterans Health Administration. Using iterative usability testing, feedback report content evolved over cycles of the three steps. Following the steps in the proposed method through 12 iterations with 13 participants, we improved the usability of the feedback reports. Conclusions UCD methods can improve feedback report content through an iterative process. When designing feedback reports, refining measures , data , and display may enable report designers to improve the user centeredness of feedback reports.

AUDIPOC is a nationwide clinical audit that describes the characteristics, interventions and outcomes of patients admitted to Spanish hospitals because of an exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ECOPD), assessing the compliance of these parameters with current international guidelines. The present study describes hospital resources, hospital factors related to case recruitment variability, patients' characteristics, and adherence to guidelines. An organisational database was completed by all participant hospitals recording resources and organisation. Over an 8-week period 11,564 consecutive ECOPD admissions to 129 Spanish hospitals covering 70% of the Spanish population were prospectively identified. At hospital discharge, 5,178 patients (45% of eligible) were finally included, and thus constituted the audited population. Audited patients were reassessed 90 days after admission for survival and readmission rates. A wide variability was observed in relation to most variables, hospital adherence to guidelines, and readmissions and death. Median inpatient mortality was 5% (across-hospital range 0-35%). Among discharged patients, 37% required readmission (0-62%) and 6.5% died (0-35%). The overall mortality rate was 11.6% (0-50%). Hospital size and complexity and aspects related to hospital COPD awareness were significantly associated with case recruitment. Clinical management most often complied with diagnosis and treatment recommendations but rarely (<50%) addressed guidance on healthy life-styles. The AUDIPOC study highlights the large across-hospital variability in resources and organization of hospitals, patient characteristics, process of care, and outcomes. The study also identifies resources and organizational characteristics associated with the admission of COPD cases, as well as aspects of daily clinical care amenable to improvement.

IntroductionMany types of audits are commonly used in hospital care to promote quality improvements. However, the evidence on the effectiveness of audits is mixed. The objectives of this proposed realist review are (1) to understand how and why audits might, or might not, work in terms of delivering the intended outcome of improved quality of hospital care and (2) to examine under what circumstances audits could potentially be effective. This protocol will provide the rationale for using a realist review approach and outline the method.Methods and analysisThis review will be conducted using an iterative four-stage approach. The first and second steps have already been executed. The first step was to develop an initial programme theory based on the literature that explains how audits are supposed to work. Second, a systematic literature search was conducted using relevant databases. Third, data will be extracted and coded for concepts relating to context, outcomes and their interrelatedness. Finally, the data will be synthesised in a five-step process: (1) organising the extracted data into evidence tables, (2) theming, (3) formulating chains of inference from the identified themes, (4) linking the chains of inference and formulating CMO configurations and (5) refining the initial programme theory. The reporting of the review will follow the ‘Realist and Meta-Review Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards’ (RAMESES) publication standards.Ethics and disseminationThis review does not require formal ethical approval. A better understanding of how and why these audits work, and how context impacts their effectiveness, will inform stakeholders in deciding how to tailor and implement audits within their local context. We will use a range of dissemination strategies to ensure that findings from this realist review are broadly disseminated to academic and non-academic audiences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016039882.

PurposeThe COVID-19 pandemic has impacted healthcare systems globally, little is known about the trauma patterns during a national lockdown. The aim of this study is to delineate the trauma patterns and outcomes at Aintree University Teaching Hospital level 1 Major Trauma Centre (MTC) during the COVID-19 lockdown imposed by the U.K. government.MethodsA retrospective cohort study data from the Merseyside and Cheshire Trauma Audit and Research Network database were analysed. The 7-week ‘lockdown period’ was compared to a 7-week period prior to the lockdown and also to an equivalent 7-week period corresponding to the previous year.ResultsA total of 488 patients were included in the study. Overall, there was 37.6% and 30.0% reduction in the number of traumatic injuries during lockdown. Road traffic collisions (RTC) reduced by 42.6% and 46.6%. RTC involving a car significantly reduced during lockdown, conversely, bike-related RTC significantly increased. No significant changes were noted in deliberate self-harm, trauma severity and crude mortality during lockdown. There was 1 mortality from COVID-19 infection in the lockdown cohort.ConclusionTrauma continues during lockdown, our MTC has continued to provide a full service during lockdown. However, trauma patterns have changed and departments should adapt to balance these alongside the COVID-19 pandemic. As the U.K. starts its cautious transition out of lockdown, trauma services are required to be flexible during changes in national social restrictions and changing trauma patterns. COVID-19 and lockdown state were found to have no significant impact on survival outcomes for trauma.

Background Many people with musculoskeletal (MSK) disorders wait several months or years for Consultant Doctor appointments, despite often not requiring medical or surgical interventions. To allow earlier patient access to orthopaedic and rheumatology services in Ireland, Advanced Practice Physiotherapists (APPs) were introduced at 16 major acute hospitals. This study performed the first national evaluation of APP triage services. Method Throughout 2014, APPs ( n  = 22) entered clinical data on a national database. Analysis of these data using descriptive statistics determined patient wait times, Consultant Doctor involvement in clinical decisions, and patient clinical outcomes. Chi square tests were used to compare patient clinical outcomes across orthopaedic and rheumatology clinics. A pilot study at one site identified re-referral rates to orthopaedic/rheumatology services of patients managed by the APPs. Results In one year, 13,981 new patients accessed specialist orthopaedic and rheumatology consultations via the APP. Median wait time for an appointment was 5.6 months. Patients most commonly presented with knee (23%), lower back (22%) and shoulder (15%) disorders. APPs made autonomous clinical decisions regarding patient management at 77% of appointments, and managed patient care pathways without onward referral to Consultant Doctors in more than 80% of cases. Other onward clinical pathways recommended by APPs were: physiotherapy referrals (42%); clinical investigations (29%); injections administered (4%); and surgical listing (2%). Of those managed by the APP, the pilot study identified that only 6.5% of patients were re-referred within one year. Conclusion This national evaluation of APP services demonstrated that the majority of patients assessed by an APP did not require onward referral for a Consultant Doctor appointment. Therefore, patients gained earlier access to orthopaedic and rheumatology consultations in secondary care, with most patients conservatively managed.

Objective To explore how the output of national clinical audits in England is used by professionals and whether and how their impact could be enhanced. Methods A mixed-methods study with the primary recipients of four national clinical audits of cancer care of 607 local audit leads, 274 (45%) completed a questionnaire and 32 participated in an interview. Our questions focused on how the audits were used and whether barriers existed to using the audits for local service improvement. We described variation in questionnaire responses between the audits using chi-squared tests. Results are reported as percentages with their 95% confidence intervals. Qualitative data were analysed using Framework analysis. Results More than 90% of survey respondents believed that the audit findings were relevant to their clinical work, and interviewees described how they used the audits for a range of purposes. Forty-two percent of survey respondents said they had changed their clinical practice, and 56% had implemented service improvements in response to the audits. The degree of change differed between the four audits, evident in both the questionnaire and the interview data. In the interviews, two recurring barriers emerged: (1) the importance of data quality, which, in turn, influenced the perceived relevance and validity of the audit data and therefore the ability to make changes based on it and (2) the need for clear presentation of benchmarked local performance data. The perceived authority and credibility of the professional bodies supporting the audits was a key factor underpinning the use of the audit findings. Conclusion National cancer audit and feedback is used to improve services, but their impact could be enhanced by improving the data quality and relevance of feedback.