Jump to content

Search the hub

Showing results for tags 'Monitoring'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Start to type the tag you want to use, then select from the list.

  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • All
    • Commissioning, service provision and innovation in health and care
    • Coronavirus (COVID-19)
    • Culture
    • Improving patient safety
    • Investigations, risk management and legal issues
    • Leadership for patient safety
    • Organisations linked to patient safety (UK and beyond)
    • Patient engagement
    • Patient safety in health and care
    • Patient Safety Learning
    • Professionalising patient safety
    • Research, data and insight
    • Miscellaneous

Categories

  • Commissioning, service provision and innovation in health and care
    • Commissioning and funding patient safety
    • Digital health and care service provision
    • Health records and plans
    • Innovation programmes in health and care
    • Climate change/sustainability
  • Coronavirus (COVID-19)
    • Blogs
    • Data, research and statistics
    • Frontline insights during the pandemic
    • Good practice and useful resources
    • Guidance
    • Mental health
    • Exit strategies
    • Patient recovery
  • Culture
    • Bullying and fear
    • Good practice
    • Occupational health and safety
    • Safety culture programmes
    • Second victim
    • Speak Up Guardians
    • Staff safety
    • Whistle blowing
  • Improving patient safety
    • Clinical governance and audits
    • Design for safety
    • Disasters averted/near misses
    • Equipment and facilities
    • Error traps
    • Health inequalities
    • Human factors (improving human performance in care delivery)
    • Improving systems of care
    • Implementation of improvements
    • International development and humanitarian
    • Safety stories
    • Stories from the front line
    • Workforce and resources
  • Investigations, risk management and legal issues
    • Investigations and complaints
    • Risk management and legal issues
  • Leadership for patient safety
    • Business case for patient safety
    • Boards
    • Clinical leadership
    • Exec teams
    • Inquiries
    • International reports
    • National/Governmental
    • Patient Safety Commissioner
    • Quality and safety reports
    • Techniques
    • Other
  • Organisations linked to patient safety (UK and beyond)
    • Government and ALB direction and guidance
    • International patient safety
    • Regulators and their regulations
  • Patient engagement
    • Consent and privacy
    • Harmed care patient pathways/post-incident pathways
    • How to engage for patient safety
    • Keeping patients safe
    • Patient-centred care
    • Patient stories
  • Patient safety in health and care
    • Care settings
    • Conditions
    • Diagnosis
    • High risk areas
    • Learning disabilities
    • Medication
    • Mental health
    • Men's health
    • Patient management
    • Social care
    • Transitions of care
    • Women's health
  • Patient Safety Learning
    • Patient Safety Learning campaigns
    • Patient Safety Learning documents
    • Patient Safety Learning news archive
    • 2-minute Tuesdays
    • Patient Safety Learning Annual Conference 2019
    • Patient Safety Learning Annual Conference 2018
    • Patient Safety Learning Awards 2019
    • Patient Safety Learning Interviews
    • Patient Safety Learning webinars
  • Professionalising patient safety
    • Accreditation for patient safety
    • Competency framework
    • Medical students
    • Patient safety standards
    • Training
  • Research, data and insight
    • Data and insight
    • Research
  • Miscellaneous

News

  • News

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start
    End

Last updated

  • Start
    End

Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End

Group

First name

Last name

Country

Join a private group (if appropriate)

About me

Organisation

Role

Found 109 results
  1. News Article
    Mobile apps to track patients' health are keeping them out of hospital and could cut waiting times, experts have said. It follows a trial of a new app which heart patients are using through their mobile phones. The trial allows clinicians to change treatments quickly and uses video consultations, avoiding unnecessary hospital visits. Rhodri Griffiths is the innovation adoption director at Life Sciences Hub Wales, and is looking for more ways to introduce similar technology. He believes the pandemic accelerated the use and acceptance of digital solutions in healthcare, by patients and clinicians. "We really are looking at a big digital revolution within healthcare and there are an amazing myriad of things coming through," he said. He explained data collected by smartphones and watches can help predict who is likely to have a heart attack. "We can avoid that happening. So prevention is key but it's also looking at how some of this can impact on waiting lists," he said. "So, looking at how theatres are used, which patients can be prioritised? "In social care it's looking at how pain is managed by face recognition." Mr Griffiths said he believed the data collected could also identify wider problems: "It's combining these digital solutions with our genetic information - bringing big data together on a population level we can start spotting trends". Read full story Source: BBC News, 4 August 2022
  2. Event
    until
    This webinar from the Institute of Global Health Innovation explores the safety, effectiveness and global relevance of pulse oximetry for at-home monitoring of Covid-19. Pulse oximeters are being explored as a tool for people with COVID-19 to keep an eye on their health at home, away from healthcare settings. These are widely available, low-cost devices that shine light through a person’s finger to assess their blood oxygen saturation. Evidence has shown that a fall in blood oxygen levels is a critical indicator that a COVID-19 patient’s health is deteriorating and they may need closer monitoring and urgent treatment. But what is the evidence surrounding their effectiveness, and are they a safe way for people to monitor themselves at home? Join our webinar as we explore these important questions while discussing their applications in the UK health system and globally, with particular attention to their relevance in low- and middle-income countries. We will also discuss findings of the ongoing NHS COVID Oximetry at Home (CO@H) programme, which supports people at home who have been diagnosed with coronavirus and are most at risk of becoming seriously unwell. This virtual event will consist of a series of short talks by experts from IGHI followed by a live audience Q&A, giving you the chance to ask any questions you may have. Speakers Professor the Lord Ara Darzi, IGHI co-director Dr Ana Luisa Neves, IGHI Advanced Research Fellow and Associate Director, NIHR Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, IGHI Dr Jonny Clarke, Sir Henry Wellcome Postdoctoral Research Fellow, IGHI, Imperial College London Dr Ahmed Alboksmaty, IGHI Research Associate Professor Paul Aylin, Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health, IGHI Dr Thomas Beaney, IGHI Clinical Research Fellow Register for the webinar
  3. Event
    This conference focuses on reducing medication errors and the level of severe, avoidable harm related to medications. The conference focuses on prioritising high risk medications and high risk patient groups to enable your interventions to have the highest impact on patient care and reduction in patient harm. The conference which aims to bring together clinicians and pharmacists, managers, and medication safety officers and leads will reflect on medication safety issues that have arisen as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, help you to understand current national developments, and allow you to debate and discuss key issues and areas in improving and monitoring medication safety, reducing medication errors and harm in hospitals. For further information and to book your place visit https://www.healthcareconferencesuk.co.uk/conferences-masterclasses/reducing-medication-errors or email kate@hc-uk.org.uk hub members receive a 20% discount. Email infor@pslhub.org for discount code. Follow on Twitter @HCUK_Clare #MedicationErrors
  4. Event
    until
    This Westminister Forum conference will discuss the priorities for NICE within health and social care following the publication of the NICE Strategy 2021 to 2026: Dynamic, Collaborative, Excellent earlier this year, which sets out NICE’s vision and priorities for transformation over the next five years, including: rapid and responsive evaluation of technology, and increasing uptake and access to new treatments flexible and up-to-date guideline recommendations which integrate the latest evidence and innovative practices improving the effective uptake of guidance through collaboration and monitoring providing scientific leadership through driving research and data use to address gaps in the evidence base. It will be an opportunity to discuss the role of NICE in a changing health and social care landscape following the pandemic, as well as the opportunities presented for guidance to keep pace with the development of integrated care, innovative treatments, and data-driven research and technology. Sessions in the agenda include: key priorities for delivering the future vision and transformation of NICE going forward developing evidence-based guidelines in a changing health and social care landscape: flexibility, patient engagement, collaboration, and effective implementation lessons learned from the use of rapid guidelines in response to COVID-19 the opportunities presented for improving the utilisation of data and the future for data-driven evidence and guidelines taking forward new approaches to evaluating health technology - speed, cost-effectiveness, and engagement priorities for industry engagement and improving value and access to innovative health technology supporting the development and adoption of innovative medicines the role of managed access and funding in delivering improved patient access to innovation opportunities for using research and data analytics to meet gaps in the evidence base. Register
  5. Community Post
    I would be interested to know, if overnight, patients who score 0-2 on NEWS which has not changed with no concerns since the last set of observations, what your trust policy is on observation frequency? Does your trust require observations to be carried out 4 hourly minimum regardless of patients NEWS score and stability? Or if there are no concerns and the patient is clinically stable with consecutive NEWS 0-2 that they do not have observations taken overnight? Looking forward to hearing what other trust practices are.
  6. Content Article
  7. Content Article
    Key findings Patients, their care partners and care providers express that safety is more than the absence of harm. Safe care requires a proactive approach, with ongoing engagement of patients and their care partners. A number of strategies can be used to enable safer care including giving patients and care partners access to information and engaging them in safety discussions (huddles, bedside reporting, etc). Care partners, volunteers, advocates, and/or a point person (provider) is required to improve communication with patients and increase opportunities for them to be meaningfully involved in their care.
  8. Content Article
  9. Content Article
    ADRe is designed for use by nursing staff (NVQ level 3-5 or above), the professionals closest to patients. By using ADRe complex information on drugs is combined into a checklist providing advice on common problems. This helps nurses recognise and act on adverse drug reaction, including pain, dental pain, aggression, peptic ulcers, and sedation. In doing so, it greatly enhances the administration of medicines, and by capturing this individualised picture of the patients’ health and well-being prompts prescribers to refine dosages. ADRe is very simple to use: Nurses use the Profile to check and record problems that might be related to prescribed medicine. Nurses solve some problems, e.g. dental pain, dehydration, by referrals or paying closer attention to intake. Nurses share the completed ADRe Profile with prescribers (GPs or specialists), who decide prescriptions and doses. Repeating the Profile one month later ensures no new issues have arisen. You can request a copy of the full tool, or even try out part of our digital app by registering.
  10. Content Article
    How do we know we are safe? This is the Holy Grail that has led to many publications and much research. Authors such as Berwick, Dekker and Syed have written insightful and clear reports that detail that safety is about much more than mere compliance to rules, reporting of incidents and monitoring risk. Local context In my previous blog I shared Solent NHS Trust’s staff survey results, which show high confidence in our staff about safety, having a voice and speaking up. The organisation works hard to define how safe we are and uses a variety of measures for this. Incident reporting is high for a trust of our size and is the highest in our group. The levels of harm are consistently low and the structures for scrutiny and investigation are clean and regularly audited. An active risk register is regularly updated and shared. We still have a long way to go on our journey towards truly triangulated data. There is a real commitment to get there. We seek to learn and have a 'Best in Class' Research and QI Academy. We have regular sharing events – the question on all our lips is often “How do we truly learn?” We monitor safe staffing regularly; even more so at times of significant pressures. A Rapid Quality Impact assessment process, which ensures that rapid change can take place but must be monitored for quality with regular post change follow up. Wider context We are not alone – many trusts share these traits. So what do our staff say about this? Our staff survey (68% participation) shows our staff believe we are safe. We have a larger than normal network of Freedom to Speak Up Guardians and consistently perform well nationally in the annual guardians’ survey. So, what’s the problem – our safety climate is good by all agreed measures? But is it as good as it can be? The key players who can comment on whether we are safe are those delivering care and those receiving it – our community. Our wider community are central to what we do. We have a really ground-breaking community and patient engagement programme. It is the belief of our senior team that complaints are a gift of feedback that help us learn and can shine a light on safety concerns. We take these seriously. When a complaint is made our patient experience team will ask the question “How can we make this it better?” as this will help us learn and improve the experience for other people. Again, it is not perfect but comes from a place of positive intent and partnership. Although staff say the organisation is safe, we have never asked them what that means. We have yet to get them to describe what is safe in their team and what is not safe. It is only from this perspective of safety in the ‘work as done' that an organisation can understand what the real issues are. Through this approach we can support staff to be not just the eyes and ears of safety but the mechanism of making their world safer. The learning across teams could truly drive change across our clinical teams. It was from this position that I decided to undertake a series of “Safety Chats” in clinical areas. A brief outline of them is below but these will be covered in the next blog in this series. If you would like to discuss Safety Chats further, please email me at: Gina.Winter-Bates@solent.nhs.uk Other blogs in the Safety Chat series Safety Chats blog series: Part 1 Part 3 - Starting the conversation Part 4 - Talking about safety and creating safer environments
  11. Content Article
  12. Content Article
    The report highlights the following key findings: The maternity service was offering care to women whose pregnancies represented a high risk, but did not have the necessary systems or staff with the appropriate skills in place to manage such cases. There was a lack of input from consultants at crucial times, and there was an over reliance on junior staff to manage complex and difficult cases with little guidance or support. Consultant obstetricians did not routinely carry out ward rounds when they were responsible for overseeing care in the labour ward and the teamwork between midwives and obstetricians was not as effective as it should have been. Therefore, there was no adequate mechanism in place for staff to discuss concerns that they may have had about the women. There was an excessive reliance on the use of locum and agency staff, who did not always receive the necessary guidance or support. Deficiencies in the management structures also contributed to the poor quality of care the women received, for example midwives were expected to manage a busy delivery suite that was reliant on agency and locum staff, with at times, little professional or managerial support. Around the time of the first deaths the midwives received little professional support from the supervisors of midwives. In the majority of cases the women attended their hospital and GP antenatal appointments and sought help when they felt unwell. Yet despite this, in a number of the cases, clinical staff failed to recognise and respond to the severity of the condition of the women, thereby reducing the chances of survival of the women. In some of the cases there were minor deficiencies in care which, in isolation, may not have had such a dramatic impact, but when occurring together had serious consequences for the health of the women concerned. The anaesthetic staff involved in the care of the women responded well, often in difficult circumstances. The haematology department responded efficiently in providing the necessary, and at times large, volumes of blood and blood products. In two of the cases there was an absence of documentation for surgical procedures that were carried out by the obstetric staff and in one case there was an absence of contemporaneous documentation. Related reading An independent review of serious untoward incidents and clinical governance systems within maternity services at Northwick Park Hospital (16 September 2008)
  13. Community Post
    Hello I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has done any work on how we monitor patient deterioration overnight? I am currently working on am improvement project looking at patient surveillance of deterioration during night shifts. I have chosen this project as part of a Clinical Improvement Scholarship Program I am on. The program is combined with my day job as a Critical Care Outreach Sister as well as enabling me to develop my research and leadership skills alongside implementing improvements in clinical care. I am in the early stages of my work, however I have some literature and local research around deficiencies in how we monitor patients for deterioration overnight (as well as personal experiences as a CCOT nurse) which is why this topic is so important to me. I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has worked on anything similar, or can point me in the direction of anyone who maybe able to help. Thank you ?
  14. Content Article
  15. Content Article
    Recommendation 1: There should be an urgent review of pulse oximetry medical products used in the United Kingdom Recommendation 2: Identification of suitable parameters to identify hypoxia need to be verified Recommendation 3: Review of all medical equipment and devices Recommendation 4: Further research To read the full report and detailed recommendations, follow the link below.
  16. Content Article
  17. Content Article
  18. Content Article
  19. Content Article
    As a result of the investigation, one recommendation has been made to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) on assessing factors such teamwork and psychological safety in its regulation of maternity units. Based on the evidence gathered, the report also sets out a series of questions to consider in order to help staff identify strengths and opportunities for improvement within their own maternity unit. Safety recommendation It is recommended that the Care Quality Commission, in collaboration with relevant stakeholders, includes assessment of relational aspects such as multidisciplinary teamwork and psychological safety in its regulation of maternity units. Questions to consider Does your unit have a role, or another means, separate from the labour ward co-ordinator, dedicated to monitoring and anticipation of activity across the maternity service and troubleshooting, such as a roving bleep holder? Do you have regular multidisciplinary ward rounds throughout the day? Do you have regular safety huddles and multidisciplinary handovers using a structured information tool? Do you hold multidisciplinary in situ simulation and facilitated debriefing that includes both technical and non-technical skills? Are scenarios and incidents encountered in your unit included in the training? Do you know what your staff’s perceptions of teamwork, psychological safety and communication are within your unit? Are actions taken in response? How are midwifery staff empowered to contact consultants directly if they have concerns? Is time and resource dedicated to regular multidisciplinary forums that provide a safe space to openly discuss scenarios where things did not go well? Do these forums also include discussion and reflection on scenarios where things went well despite unexpected events? Are senior midwifery staff assigned to triage and assessment areas? Is there adequate medical presence in these areas? In larger units, is the workload on the labour ward separated into elective and emergency work? If so, are there separate labour ward co-ordinators for each? How does the physical infrastructure support work? For example, use of DECT telephones, availability of equipment, consultant offices on/near the labour ward, proximity of antenatal ward and neonatal unit to the labour ward. How are issues with staffing and workload escalated and responded to? Are senior trust personnel aware and involved?
  20. Content Article
    The purpose of this review from Hutchinson et al. was to systematically examine published and grey research reports in order to assess the state of the science regarding the validity and reliability of the RAI-MDS 2.0 Quality Indicators (QIs). The authors found that evidence for the reliability and validity of the RAI-MDS QIs remains inconclusive. The QIs provide a useful tool for quality monitoring and to inform quality improvement programs and initiatives. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting the QI results and other sources of evidence of the quality of care processes should be considered in conjunction with QI results.
  21. Content Article
    Key points This framework highlights the following five dimensions, which the authors believe should be included in any safety and monitoring approach in order to give a comprehensive and rounded picture of an organisation’s safety: Past harm: this encompasses both psychological and physical measures. Reliability: this is defined as ‘failure free operation over time’ and applies to measures of behaviour, processes and systems. Sensitivity to operations: the information and capacity to monitor safety on an hourly or daily basis. Anticipation and preparedness: the ability to anticipate, and be prepared for, problems. Integration and learning: the ability to respond to, and improve from, safety information.
  22. Content Article
  23. Content Article
  24. News Article
    The Royal Surrey County Hospital is preparing to open its first virtual ward. From this summer 15 patients will receive treatment at home using apps and wearable technology, as an alternative to a stay in hospital. The ward will be overseen by a consultant, working with therapists, nursing staff and pharmacists. The hospital, in Guildford, plans to extend the ward to 52 patients by April 2024. Health providers across England have been asked to deliver virtual wards at a rate of 40 to 50 beds per 100,000 people by December 2023. It is hoped they will free up beds more quickly, speeding up admissions from A&E and for elective surgery. Read full story Source: BBC News, 7 June 2022
  25. News Article
    Nearly 900 patients with type 1 diabetes in England are testing a potentially life-changing artificial pancreas. It can eliminate the need for finger prick tests and prevent life-threatening hypoglycaemic attacks, where blood sugar levels fall too low. The technology uses a sensor under the skin. It continually monitors the levels, and a pump automatically adjusts the amount of insulin required. Six-year-old Charlotte, from Lancashire, is one of more than 200 children using the hybrid closed loop system. Her mother, Ange Abbott, told us it has made a massive impact on the whole family. "Prior to having the loop, everything was manual," she said. "At night we'd have to set the alarm every two hours to do finger pricks and corrections of insulin in order to deal with the ups and downs of Charlotte's blood sugars." Prof Partha Kar, NHS national speciality adviser for diabetes, said: "Having machines monitor and deliver medication for diabetes patients sounds quite sci-fi like, but technology and machines are part and parcel of how we live our lives every day. "It is not very far away from the holy grail of a fully automated system, where people with type 1 diabetes can get on with their lives without worrying about glucose levels or medication." Read full story Source: BBC News, 1 April 2022 Further reading on the hub How safe are closed loop artificial pancreas systems?
×