Search the hub
Showing results for tags 'High risk groups'.
-
Content Article
Based on an analysis of surgical data received through the Patient Safety Organization, plus detailed research and expert evaluation, this Deep Dive identifies and provides actionable recommendations and tools on six key risk categories of adverse event reports related to operative procedures: complications patient and OR readiness retained surgical instruments contamination equipment failures wrong surgery. There are common themes echoed through each of the six event types examined in this Deep Dive. These include the following: Communication problems are an underlying issue. Problems with communication—whether between the scheduler and the OR team, between clinical staff and the patient, or among the OR team—can lead to adverse events or near misses. Organisations should promote a team approach. Taking a team approach to surgical procedures can help avoid many of the adverse events reported in this Deep Dive. Such an approach is an element of a culture of safety and should be emphasised through team-building exercises. Organisations should focus on addressing preventable events. Some events are not preventable, meaning that no matter how well the team prepares, the event would likely have happened anyway. For example, the patient could have an allergic reaction resulting from an unknown anesthesia allergy, or a rare but known risk of surgery occurring. Focusing on preventable events can help focus the surgical team’s attention, however, thereby reducing the risk of unpreventable events as well. Quality improvement should be emphasized to reduce risk. Clinical staff should apply a quality improvement mentality to any problems that emerge, and focus on actions that can be taken to prevent such problems in the future.- Posted
-
- Surgery - General
- Surgeon
- (and 4 more)
-
Content Article
What this means for healthcare professionals Based on existing data, healthcare professionals should be aware that pregnant and recently pregnant women with COVID-19 might manifest fewer symptoms than the general population, with the overall pattern similar to that of the general population. Emerging comparative data indicate the potential for an increase in the rates of admission to intensive care units and invasive ventilation in pregnant women compared with non-pregnant women. Mothers with pre-existing comorbidities will need to be considered as a high risk group for COVID-19, along with those who are obese and of greater maternal age. Clinicians will need to balance the need for regular multidisciplinary antenatal care to manage women with pre-existing comorbidities against unnecessary exposure to the virus, through virtual clinic appointments when possible. Pregnant women with COVID-19 before term gestation might need to be managed in a unit with facilities to care for preterm neonates.- Posted
-
- Pregnancy
- High risk groups
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with:
-
News Article
The NHS needs to protect the GPs at high risk from covid
Clive Flashman posted a news article in News
Dr Rebecca Fisher gives the lowdown on why maintaining general practice as a ‘front door’ to the NHS that is safe for both GPs and patients is not easy. It’s fair to say that Matt Hancock’s pronouncement that henceforth all consultations should be “teleconsultations unless there’s a compelling reason not to”, has not been universally welcomed in general practice. In my surgery, practicing in a pandemic has seen us change our ways of working beyond imagination. In March, like many other practices, we shifted overnight to a “telephone first” approach. And whilst at peak-pandemic we kept face-to-face consultations to a minimum, we’re now seeing more and more patients in person again. Although many consultations can be safely done over the phone, we’re very clear that there are some patients – and some conditions and circumstances – where a patient needs a face-to-face appointment with a GP. NHS England have also been clear that all practices must offer face-to-face consultations if clinically appropriate. But maintaining general practice as a “front door” to the NHS that is safe for both GPs and patients is not easy. Options to quarantine and pre-test patients set out in national guidance and intended to help protect secondary care cannot be deployed in primary care. Other national guidance – for example regarding wearing masks in clinical sites – often seems to be issued with secondary care in mind, with little or delayed clarity for primary care. Measures like maintaining social distancing are also likely to be harder in general practice, where the ability of a surgery to physically distance staff from each other, and patients from each other and staff, is in part dependent on physical factors. Options to quarantine and pre-test patients set out in national guidance and intended to help protect secondary care cannot be deployed in primary care Things like the size and layout of a practice, or the availability of a car park for patients to wait in are hard to change quickly. Stemming from those challenges are ones related to staffing; how to keep practice staff safe from covid-19? NHS England and the British Medical Association have stated that staff should have rigorous, culturally sensitive risk assessment and consider ceasing direct patient contact where risks from covid-19 are high. The risk of catching COVID-19 – or dying from it – is not equally distributed amongst GPs. Age, sex, ethnicity, and underlying health conditions are all important risk factors. New Health Foundation research finds that not only are a significant proportion of GPs at high or very high risk of death from covid-19 (7.9 per cent), but one in three single-handed practices is likely to be run by a GP at high risk. If those GPs step back from face-to-face consultations we estimate that at least 700,000 patients could be left without access to in-person appointments. Even more concerningly, there’s a marked deprivation gradient. If GPs at high risk from COVID-19 step back from direct face-to-face appointments, and gaps in provision aren’t plugged, the patients likely to be most affected are those in deprived areas – the same people who have already been hardest hit by the pandemic GPs at high risk of death from covid are much more likely to be working in areas of greater socioeconomic deprivation. And single-handed practices run by GPs classed as being at very high risk from covid are more than four times as likely to be located in the most deprived clinical commissioning groups than the most affluent. If GPs at high risk from COVID-19 step back from direct face-to-face appointments, and gaps in provision aren’t plugged, the patients likely to be most affected are those in deprived areas – the same people who have already been hardest hit by the pandemic. Where do solutions lie? Ultimate responsibility for providing core general practice services to populations lies with CCGs. In some areas, collaborations between practices (such as GP federations and primary care networks), may be able to organise cross-cover to surgeries where face-to-face provision is not adequate to meet need. But these collaborations have not developed at equal pace across the country, have many demands on their capacity and may not be sufficiently mature to take on this challenge. These local factors – including the availability of locums – will need to be considered by commissioners. It’s vital that CCGs act quickly to understand the extent to which the concerns around GP supply highlighted by our research apply in their localities. In some cases, additional funding will be needed to enable practices to ‘buy in’ locum support for face-to-face consultations. This should be considered a core part of the NHS covid response. Face-to-face GP appointments remain a crucial NHS service, and must be available to the population in proportion with need. Just as in secondary care, protecting staff, and protecting patients in primary care will require additional investment. Failure to adequately assess the extent of the problem, and to provide sufficient resource to engineer solutions is likely to further exacerbate existing health inequalities. Original Source: The HSJ- Posted
-
- High risk groups
- GP
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with:
-
News Article
My brain scan was urgent, but because of Covid-19 it didn't go ahead
Clive Flashman posted a news article in News
Doctors and surgeons’ leaders have issued a warning that the NHS must not shut down normal care again if a second wave of Covid-19 hits as that would risk patients dying from lack of treatment. Here, one patient tells her story. Marie Temple (not her real name) was distraught when her MRI was cancelled in March, shortly after the UK went into lockdown and Boris Johnson ordered the NHS to cancel all non-urgent treatment. Temple, who lives in the north of England, was diagnosed with a benign brain tumour last year after suffering seizures and shortly afterwards had surgery to remove it. She had been promised a follow-up MRI scan in late March to see if the surgery had been a success, but she received a letter saying her hospital was dealing only with emergency cases and she didn’t qualify. Read the full article here.- Posted
-
- Virus
- High risk groups
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
News Article
New analysis lays bare government’s failure to protect social care from COVID-19
Clive Flashman posted a news article in News
New analysis by the Health Foundation reveals the devastating impact the pandemic has had on social care in England. The independent charity says the findings provide further evidence that the government acted too slowly and did not do enough to support social care users and staff, and that protecting social care has been given far lower priority than the NHS. The Health Foundation finds that policy action on social care has focused primarily on care homes and that this has risked leaving out other vulnerable groups of users and services, including those receiving care in their own homes (domiciliary care). It also notes that the shortcomings of the government’s response have been made worse by longstanding political neglect and chronic underfunding of the social care system. Since March there have been more than 30,500 excess deaths* among care home residents in England and 4,500 excess deaths among people receiving domiciliary care. While high numbers of excess deaths of people living in care homes have been well reported, the analysis shows there has been a greater proportional increase in deaths among domiciliary care users than in care homes (225% compared to 208%). And while deaths in care homes have now returned to average levels for this time of year, the latest data (up until 19 June) shows that there have continued to be excess deaths reported among domiciliary care users. The Health Foundation says that decades of inaction by successive governments have meant that the social care system entered the pandemic underfunded, understaffed, and at risk of collapse. Read full article here. -
News Article
Quarter of BAME staff have not had a covid risk assessment
Clive Flashman posted a news article in News
More than a quarter of black, Asian and minority ethnic NHS staff had not yet had a risk assessment in relation to their exposure to coronavirus, according to the latest data collection by national NHS leaders. Full article here on the HSJ website (paywalled)- Posted
-
- Testing
- High risk groups
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with:
-
News Article
Government censored BAME covid-risk review
Patient Safety Learning posted a news article in News
The government removed a key section from Public Health England’s review (published Tuesday) of the relative risk of COVID-19 to specific groups, HSJ has discovered. The review reveals the virus poses a greater risk to those who are older, male and overweight. The risk is also described as “disproportionate” for those with Asian, Caribbean and black ethnicities. It makes no attempt to explain why the risk to BAME groups should be higher. An earlier draft of the review which was circulated within government last week contained a section which included responses from the 1,000-plus organisations and individuals who supplied evidence to the review. Many of these suggested that discrimination and poorer life chances were playing a part in the increased risk of COVID-19 to those with BAME backgrounds. HSJ understands this section was an annex to the report but could also stand alone. Typical was the following recommendation from the response by the Muslim Council of Britain, which stated: “With high levels of deaths of BAME healthcare workers, and extensive research showing evidence and feelings of structural racism and discrimination in the NHS, PHE should consider exploring this in more detail, and looking into specific measures to tackle the culture of discrimination and racism. It may also be of value to issue a clear statement from the NHS that this is not acceptable, committing to introducing change.” One source with knowledge of the review said the section “did not survive contact with Matt Hancock’s office” over the weekend. Read full story Source: HSJ, 2 June 2020- Posted
-
- Patient death
- High risk groups
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with:
-
Content Article
Further serious patient safety incidents: why are staff still not being listened to when concerns are raised?
Anonymous posted an article in Whistle blowing
Complaints from staff are not being heeded. Why is it that healthcare staff's opinions and pleas for their safety and the safety of patients do not matter? Here are just some examples of where safety has been compromised: Disposable gowns are being reused by keeping them in a room and then reusing after 3 days. There were no fit tests. Staff were informed by management that "one size fits all, no testers or kits available and no other trusts are doing it anyway". Only when the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) announced recently that fit tests were a legal requirement, then fit tests were given. I queried about fit checks only to discover that it was not part of the training and, therefore, staff were wearing masks without seals for three months before fit tests were introduced and even after fit tests! I taught my colleagues how to do fit checks via telephone. There was no processes in place at the hospital to aid staff navigation through the pandemic (no red or green areas, no donning or doffing stations, no system for ordering PPE if it ran out); it was very much carry on as normal. A hospital pathway was made one week ago, unsigned and not referenced by governance, and with no instructions on how to don and doff. Guidelines from the Association for Perioperative Practice (AFPP) and Public Health England (PHE) for induction and extubation are not being followed – only 5 minutes instead of 20 minutes. Guidelines state 5 minutes is only for laminar flow theatres. None of the theatres in this hospital have laminar flow. One of my colleagues said she was not happy to cover an ENT list because she is BAME and at moderate/high risk with underlying conditions. She had not been risk assessed and she felt that someone with lower or no risk could do the list. She was removed from the ENT list, told she would be reprimanded on return to work and asked to write a report on her unwillingness to help in treating patients. The list had delays and she was told if she had done the list it would not have suffered from delays. Just goes to show, management only care about the work and not the staff. It was only after the list, she was then risk assessed. Diathermy smoke evacuation is not being used as recommended. Diathermy is a surgical technique which uses heat from an electric current to cut tissue or seal bleeding vessels. Diathermy emissions can contain numerous toxic gases, particles and vapours and are usually invisible to the naked eye. Inhalation can adversely affect surgeons’ and theatre staff’s respiratory system. If staff get COVID-19 and die, they become a statistic and work goes on as usual. The examples listed above are all safety issues for patients and staff but, like me, my colleagues are being ignored and informed "it's a business!" when these safety concerns are raised at the hospital. The only difference is they are permanent staff and their shifts cannot be blocked whereas I was a locum nurse who found my shifts blocked after I spoke up. Why has it been allowed to carry on? Why is there no Freedom To Speak Up Guardian at the hospital? Why has nothing been done? We can all learn from each other and we all have a voice. Sir Francis said we need to "Speak Up For Change", but management continues to be reactive when we try to be proactive and initiate change. This has to stop! Actions needed We need unannounced inspections from the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and HSE when we make reports to them. Every private hospital must have an infection control team and Freedom To Speak Up Guardian in post.- Posted
-
- PPE (personal Protective Equipment)
- High risk groups
- (and 14 more)
-
Content Article
The purpose of this blog was to examine the impact of COVID-19 on access to and use of health care services for people with pre-existing health conditions including asthma, cancer diabetes, heart disease and mental health illness. The Health Foundation supported an online YouGov survey of members of the public, designed by the Resolution Foundation. 6,005 UK citizens responded to the survey between 6 and 11 May. This blog draws on the data and looks at: the level of reduction in access for care management the reasons behind the reduction in access.- Posted
-
- Underlying health conditions
- Secondary impact
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Content Article
The rheumatology community has created a global, coordinated and timely response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The alliance aims to harness the breadth of expertise and knowledge in the rheumatology physician and patient communities to advance knowledge about COVID-19 for the benefit of all patients with rheumatic diseases.- Posted
-
- High risk groups
- Medicine - Rheumatology
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Content Article
Self-isolation may be a pipe dream
Anonymous posted an article in Blogs
We knew what would be coming at us several weeks ago. Our daughter is a bit of a doomsday prepper and she had been warning us for a while. We had slowly stocked up on a few essentials, nothing ridiculous. We'd also made sure that we had supplies of our medications, and switched away from Boots to a small local pharmacy who promised to do deliveries. We had corded phones, candles, lanterns and lots of batteries in case of power outages. We had some bottled water. We had stocked up the freezer. We hadn't thought the panic buying would start so quickly, or last so long. Toilet paper was a surprise. We hadn't bought any extra of that, so that was an issue, but our daughter managed to find some for us. We are used to working from home. We have done it off and on for over a decade, so this situation is not new for us. We are tech savvy and able to use digital tools to meet our work needs. However, as freelancers, we have been hit hard by work just being cancelled and having much less to do than normal. Less money coming in too, soon. The hardest thing of all has been that while we want to heed the Government's call to stay at home as reasonably high-risk individuals, we cannot book any food deliveries. Tesco, Ocado and Morrisons have no slots available at all. Thankfully we had two already booked with Tesco before the end of this month. After that, the food will start to run out here. With rationing etc already in place, our family who do visit the shops cannot buy extra for us. At some point, regardless of the risk, we may have to leave the house. Wish us luck!!- Posted
-
- Food
- High risk groups
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with:
-
Content Article
Liver transplantation and COVID-19 (9 April 2020)
PatientSafetyLearning Team posted an article in Blogs
- Posted
-
- Surgery - General
- High risk groups
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Content Article
NHS: Specialty guides for patient management
Claire Cox posted an article in Guidance
These guides include: Surgical patients Othopaedics Critical care Endocrinology Trauma Acute General medical Burns Cancer ED Paediatrics NIV Rheumatology Management of COVID positive patients Cardiothoracics plastics Max Fax Vascular Spinal Surgery Radiology Cardiology Muscular Skeletal Haematology Maternity TB.- Posted
-
- High risk groups
- Organisational Performance
- (and 2 more)