Search the hub

The first presentation draws on a recent National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) funded mixed-methods evaluation of the translation into practice of several ‘post-Francis’ policies that have aimed to improve openness in the NHS, and identifies key conditions necessary for policies to make sustainable impact on culture and behaviour. The second presentation reflects on material from a forthcoming book which will offer unfiltered accounts from patients, carers and healthcare professionals about their good and bad experiences of how care is organised, from birth up to the end of life. Their testimonies indicate the salience of kindness and attentiveness combined with efficiency and competence. Finally, the context for a culture of openness and for patient-centred services will be presented, alongside the development of a culture change programme which is being used in 70 Trusts in England. Significant and unacceptable variations in the availability of high quality care and in staff wellbeing persist across the NHS and social care, exemplified by very different COVID-19 experiences across the sector. How far does this kind of research on culture and these kinds of programme interventions help us to gain whole system traction in this important area of laying the conditions for reliably compassionate patient care? How can positive cultures and new working practices that have developed during the COVID-19 pandemic be sustained?

Healthcare safety is complex every day – yet the emergence of the novel coronavirus has made holes in the Swiss cheese of the system more apparent. UK psychologist James Reason’s now famous “Swiss Cheese Model” serves as a metaphor for this month’s Letter from America. As more details on the coronavirus emerge, and time enables reflection on what has transpired, deeper analyses will no doubt materialise. Knowledge is developing in real time, helping us see gaps in our safety barriers and providing valuable insight to the challenge of reducing harm. The Swiss Cheese model illustrates how latent weaknesses in the protective barriers that systems build exist and become more apparent after failures occur – if we look for them. COVID-19 is just such a test; it is amplifying the holes in today’s healthcare system. A recent New Yorker essay highlights the known weaknesses in healthcare visible long before COVID-19 – racial inequities, bureaucratic inefficiencies, drug shortages, under resourced public health initiatives and fiscal prioritisation to the detriment of preparedness. Others are more specific to the pandemic: lack of access to personal protective equipment and medical devices, supply chain disruptions, hording behaviours, misinformation and patients not seeking chronic, emergency or preventive care. The essay suggests that we should not seek to return to this “normal”, but to learn, revise and improve. Holes in processes to keep patients and workers safe are also expanding as the cheese melts. Healthcare worker illness, psychological strain and suicide are revealing fractures across US healthcare delivery that undermine the ability of clinicians to provide care as they work to keep patients and themselves safe. The US National Academies of Medicine has outlined an approach to protect clinicians’ wellbeing. Through a focus on organisational and national priorities, it aims to help sideline the negative after-effects that first responders to the COVID-19 crisis may experience through a call for funding, epidemiology and real-time support for providers. Efforts to diagnose COVID-19 are thick slices of cheese with a myriad of holes that affect both clinical and policy responses. As summarised in a recent commentary, the system response is a fundamental challenge: measurement is a mess, data are inconclusive, testing processes are inconsistent and results in some cases unreliable. While this state of affairs is rapidly changing, foundational concerns are likely to remain. Economic support for organisations and States rests on the data that are apt to be skewed, ineffective and counterproductive. The international disease codes used to document COVID-19 cases are being imprecisely applied. The authors of the commentary provide suggestions to impove the use of the diagnostic codes and thus the quality of the data collected. Actions in this area are needed to inform the research so we can understand what has happened and fund and design public health initiatives and reopening strategies that enable containment, testing and equitable treatment. As time passes, suggestions for improvement informed by national and local experience appear. Communities are painfully aware of the situation COVID-19 places them in. Experts there are contextually situated to address local challenges such as population instability due to unemployment, homelessness and food insecurity. A Health Affairs blog calls for strengthening the community-based workforce to assist in propping up vulnerable populations after disaster of any kind strikes, including COVID-19. Community health workers, volunteers and nonprofit organisations are highlighted as important players in testing and contact tracing strategy implementation, psychological support provision and establishment of the infrastructure communities need to face their specific challenges. It will take resources, tenacity and courage to facilitate and sustain community level COVID-19 response. Watching media coverage can be overwhelming but can also illustrate the complexity of addressing the disruptive tendencies of the coronavirus pandemic. Newspapers and healthcare media services can provide insight into the system-level complexity of the pandemic. These services are flagging and providing access to articles from the press or literature to provide a well-rounded collection of materials to track what is happening. It’s one way to remain keep abreast of the issues: who from racial, ethnic and socioeconomic groups are impacted, what programmes and industries are being altered, where specifically in the US the virus touches, when the threat emerged to affect a particular segment of the population or workforce and why the connections between them all are important to consider. This is highlighted in a recent commentary in the Lancet, which illustrated some of the interacting components in a society responding to the threat of COVID. Tools such as these can assist in keeping us informed to combat weaknesses in failure barriers that emerge due to bias from listening to one outlet or seeking only one point of view. No matter what slice of the COVID-19 Swiss cheese sits on the plate in front of us – its holes are apparent. Experts are calling for coordinated system-wide action to prevent further loss of life and economic hardships. Other challenges are likely to emerge the longer COVID-19 influences lives. We all need to learn from the lack of success during the current response manifestation and use those insights to inform actions to prepare for the next virus wave. It will help to navigate future choppy, uncharted waters. To prepare for the 'new normal', courage to see value in failure is paramount. We should also proactively apply learnings based on what went well to better prepare organisations, systems and governments to close holes in the global approach before the next wave.

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.

Key take-away messages The healthcare organisation you work in is a system of interacting human elements, roles, responsibilities and relationships. Quality and patient safety are performed by your human-designed organisational structures, processes, leadership styles, people's professional and cultural backgrounds, and organizational policies and practices. The level of interconnection of all these aspects will impact the distribution of perception, cognition, emotion and consciousness with the organisation you work for. What goes on between people defines what your health system is and what it can become.

Key findings 59.7% think their organisation treats staff who are involved in an error, near miss or incident fairly. This is a 1 percentage point improvement since 2018 (58.3%) and continues a positive trend since 2015 (52.2%). 71.1% think their organisation takes action to ensure that reported errors, near misses or incidents do not happen again. 73.8 think their organisation acts on concerns raised by patients / service users (2018: 73.4%). 61.1% gives them feedback about changes made in response to reported errors, near misses and incidents (q17d) This is a 1 percentage point improvement since 2018 (60.0%) and continues an upward trend since 2015 (54.1%). 71.7% would feel secure raising concerns about unsafe clinical practice. This is a 1 percentage point increase since 2018 (70.7%). 59.8% were confident that their organisation would address their concern .This has continued an upward trend since 2017 (57.6%).

Better use of data is essential to speed up diagnosis, research new treatments, plan better NHS services and monitor the safety of drugs. And yet, more than two thirds of the population feel they don’t know how patient data is used in the NHS. These animations have been developed in partnership with charities, patients and clinicians. Find out why and how patient data is used.

In this video, Senior Paediatric Intensivist, Adrian Plunkett from Birmingham Childrens Hospital UK, discusses positive reporting (as opposed to incident reporting) in improving morale and outcome in sepsis.

We know from our own experiences and those of others that patient safety fears are growing daily across the NHS and social care. Staff shortages and burnout are all taking their toll on patient satisfaction, safety and standards of care. I had the pleasure of joining a webinar arranged by the Health Foundation last week where the National Director of Improvement for NHS England and NHS Improvement, Hugh McCaughey, outlined the up and coming improvement framework for the NHS. A good framework provides a skeleton on which to build. His presentation included the importance of: leadership both at the Board and at the front line people who are empowered and engaged a culture built on collaboration and continuous improvement, where it’s safe to learn co-production – engagement, empowerment and ‘lived experience’. Workshops, seminars and conversations across social media will follow in 2020 to build the thinking. So, be ready to contribute and help make sure patient safety is coming through as the top priority. And as you do, keep a copy of Roy Lilley’s latest blog in your hand. For those who don’t follow him, Roy is a health policy analyst, writer, broadcaster and commentator on the NHS and social issues. He recently posted this summary, outlining NHS electoral promises. Please do as he suggests – pin this up and bring it out every time you see a politician and whenever you have the opportunity. This way we can all ensure that these promises will be delivered.