spannaroo

This is such an interesting topic. As a Patient Safety Advisor undertaking investigations and producing reports on the findings, we have been round and round with this issue in my organisation. I find that the appetite to be fully transparent and share all details has been person dependent in my organisation, with key leadership positions determining whether or not reports should be shared based on their individual perspective. As an investigator i have also found my views on this issue evolving over the years. When we previously moved from providing the full report to a consumer through the open disclosure process, to producing a short summary instead, i was not happy and felt this was misleading, infantilising and did not reflect transparency and accountability. Since then i did receive some feedback from a consumer who was also a healthcare worker, who said that she really appreciated having just a short summary of the investigation findings. She felt that the full report would have been too overwhelming and would have placed a huge burden onto her to have all that detail and to be the person responsible for sharing the information with family members. This perspective gave me a fresh perspective on the value of a summary report. Since then we have moved into a more 'fluid' space (alongside another change in the key leadership role). we are now trialling a process where we do not routinely produce a summary to give to the consumer, but instead are focusing on better communication with the consumer throughout the investigation process with a view to tailoring the documentation they will be given through open disclosure according to their needs and wishes. i think this flexible approach will be positive from the consumer perspective, so long as we are able to listen and accommodate their needs. It is new territory for us though and may generate increased work for us investigators requiring us to produce tailored documents on a case by case basis... we will see.