Search the hub

A frank account from a healthcare assistant on the bullying she experienced after raising concerns at the care home she worked in. I was employed as a healthcare assistant in a care home, where I worked for about three months. During this time, I found out that patient safety and quality of care were undermined by healthcare assistants, and the management and the nurses did not seem to realise it. Examples included: Carers were given a box of gloves each and they were expected to use them for up to two weeks. When asked for more gloves, the manager would check the last time they took a box of gloves and would question what they had done with the last ones they collected. In order to save the gloves, carers used one pair of gloves to deliver personal care to three to five residents before changing them. They would take the rest of the gloves home and bring them back to work in the next shift. Genital care was totally neglected. Residents’ genitals were not cleaned. I spoke to a nurse in another unit about this and all she said was she thought it was being done. When carrying out personal care to one lady, I found dried faeces wrapped in her pubic hair which took me a good number of minutes to clean. When I finally finished doing it, the lady pointed at her private part and said to me “it can breathe now” and when I asked why, she said “because it has been washed”. Infection control. One of the problems was that there was never any soap in the bathrooms and places where there were wash hand basins. So, after personal care, especially after caring for residents who had opened their bowels, we could only wash our hands with clear water. Hand sanitiser dispensers were hanging empty with no sanitising gel, so no opportunity for either visitors or staff to sanitise their hands whilst in the care home. Healthcare assistants apparently had no clue about catheter care, even those working at the nursing unit where there were a few residents that had catheters. I never saw any of them doing catheter care and one day when I was doing it, my colleague was really frightened, held my hand back and said I was going to pull the catheter out. Most of the times when residents opened their bowels, carers would either clean it very shallowly, or they would only take out the soiled pads and replace them with clean ones without cleaning the area at all. As such, when you took over the shift, during the first checks you would think that a resident had opened bowels but find out that the pad was dry and clean at that moment, but the faeces on it and on their skin was dried up. Oral and nail care was another issue. Carers never did oral care, and those who bothered to document would say “resident denied oral care”. Some of the residents’ beds were not functioning, especially in the nursing unit where most of the residents were bed-ridden. This meant that healthcare assistant staff had to bend and strain their backs each time they were giving personal care, which would lead to backaches. After trying to share my concerns on the above issues with three nurses to no avail, I was only left with the choice of talking to the management. I wrote a letter of observation, accompanied by some recommendations. I ended my letter by letting the management know that I was ready to discuss my concerns with them at any time. They did not call me up for any discussion. A change in behaviour... A few days later I started noticing a change of behaviour from all staff towards me. Most of them did not talk to me, many times I found out that people were whispering things about me as when they saw me approaching them they would stop talking. One unit reported that I was very slow, and I was never assigned to work there anymore. People ignored me when I tried to join in a conversation. Each time I was working, nobody would let me do personal care. I was only allowed to work as an assistant to fellow healthcare assistants. In some rooms where I went in first and started doing personal care, they would tell me that I was taking too much time. My opinion on anything did not count. One day when I came to work, there was a small problem which needed to be fixed between one of the nurses and myself, but she refused to listen to me and insisted that I should go back home. I went home as she had asked, and the next day I called and told the manager that I was sent home last night. He started blaming me based on what the nurse had told him, which was not true, without listening to my own side of the story. I insisted that he should call a meeting where he could listen to both of us, because what the nurse had said was untrue. His response to me was that I would need a reference from him so I should be careful about the way I did things. However, he finally accepted and we agreed on a date for the meeting. But when it came to the day of the meeting, the nurse was not there. I explained myself to my manager, in the presence of the secretary. His response to the letter I wrote with my concerns in was that he appreciated it, but he thought that the care home was not the right place for me, and that he thought that I was too qualified for the job. He suggested that everybody felt threatened with my presence. I told him that that it sounded to me like he wanted to remove me from my job; a job which I very much wanted to do. When I came back for the next shift, I discovered that my shift had been cancelled and I had been replaced by someone else. I spoke to a senior carer who called my manager and he told me that he was not expecting me to come to work because of what had happened the other night. I went back home. The next day he called and told me that after due consideration, he had decided to extend my probation time to a further three months, and that I should compose myself, come to work and do only what I was expected to do. Psychologically tortured As I continued working, things got worse each day. I experienced colleagues laughing at me, talking about me, not talking to me, ignoring me; the list could go on and on. I was psychologically tortured. I developed a violent headache. Each time I thought I was going back to work I felt sick, got palpitations, felt so hot as if I had fever, at times shivering, with painful nerves. I kept asking myself whether I was wrong to have done what I did. I did a lot of self-counselling and told myself that I was going to stay at the workplace if I was not dismissed. This was because I was planning to write more letters. I had only highlighted a few of the many issues in my first letter. My hope was that one day someone was going to understand me and things would improve. One night I stopped a colleague from putting a pad on a resident she had not cleaned properly. I cleaned the resident and did vaginal and catheter care, before putting on the pad. There was another resident who was very wet, from their pyjamas to the bedding; my colleague wanted us to only change the pad and let the resident lay with the wet clothes on the wet bed “since they were going to wash her in the morning anyway”. This was the 1am check, and I argued that I could not imagine her being able to fall asleep in that condition. We ended up changing the resident’s pyjamas and putting a towel and an extra pad on the bed to make her feel comfortable. Forced into resigning My colleague became angry with me. I was surprised because I had done nothing wrong. There was altercation and she confronted me. I couldn’t tell anyone as no one would believe me. I felt excluded and alone and the only thing that came to my mind was that I should resign. When I finished work in the morning I went and told my manager that I was resigning. He told me that I was expected to give two weeks’ notice and that I should write my resignation letter that day, which I did. He told me it was rather unfortunate that it hadn’t worked out for me in the care home… Did I do the right thing? What would you do?

In a dynamic healthcare environment, patient safety is crucial. A "Conscious Actions Reduce Errors" (C.A.R.E) approach is needed to safeguard safety and reduce medical errors. The dual process theory highlights two thinking modes: intuitive (fast, automatic) and analytical (slow, deliberate). Intuitive thinking, though quick and often effective, can lead to cognitive biases like anchoring and availability heuristics. A C.A.R.E approach incorporating tools like the TWED checklist (Threat, What if I'm wrong? What else?, Evidence, Dispositional factors) and Shisa Kanko (Japanese method of pointing and calling) can help to improve decision-making and action precision in clinical settings.

These new updated guidelines, produced in collaboration between the Healthcare Infection Society and The European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, used NICE-accredited methodology to provide further advice on which practices in the operating theatre are unnecessary. The guidelines are intended for an international audience. Specifically, they discuss the current available evidence for different rituals that are commonplace in the operating theatre and highlight the gaps in knowledge with recommendations for future research.

In this article Steven Shorrock argues that understanding the complexities and nuances of human work is critical if we are to improve how work really works. In healthcare, as clinicians and other healthcare professionals navigate their roles, they encounter a diverse array of situations that create goal conflicts, dilemmas and other challenges. One way to explore these is via micro-narratives. These are short stories based on personal observations and experiences. One method to capture these is via simple written postcards. Postcards from Work (Healthcare Edition) delves into these experiences. A sample of the cards is shown within the article.

I this article for the Institute for Health Improvement, Rachel Hock highlights some of the safety concerns and issues that can arise through discriminatory attitudes and stigma associated with weight. 

The publication of a new single, shared improvement approach, ‘NHS Impact’, is an exciting milestone. It reflects recognition, at the highest level in the English NHS, that improvement principles need to be part of the mainstream approach to the challenges facing the sector. Penny Pereira, Q’s Managing Director, considers the new approach, its potential impact and what it means for members and others working to improve health and care in England and beyond.

NHS Impact ‘improving patient care together’ is the term NHS England is using for the new single, shared NHS improvement approach. This includes the five components which form the ‘DNA’ of all evidence-based improvement methods, which underpin a systematic approach to continuous improvement: Building a shared purpose and vision. Investing in people and culture. Developing leadership behaviours. Building improvement capability and capacity. Embedding improvement into management systems and processes. When these 5 components are consistently used, systems and organisations create the right conditions for continuous improvement and high performance, responding to today’s challenges, and delivering better care for patients and better outcomes for communities. Delivery and continuous improvement review Information about the delivery and continuous improvement review. Resources and materials Access improvement resources including good practice pathways and guidance documents. Real-time data Access real-time data to support improvement activities. Urgent and emergency care improvement These resources provide guidance and support to drive continuous improvement in urgent and emergency care services. Elective care improvement These resources provide guidance and support to drive continuous improvement in elective care improvement. Primary care improvement These resources provide guidance and support to drive continuous improvement in primary care improvement.

In this reflection, published in the BMJ's Post Graduate Medical Journal, Dr John Launer talks about an exercise to help people to become better supervisors, to use peer supervision as a safe space for people to develop better interactional skills generally – and particularly to cultivate their curiosity.

The Serenity Integrated Mentoring (SIM) model is described as "an innovative mental health workforce transformation model that brings together the police and community mental health services, in order to better support 'high intensity users' of Section 136 of the Mental Health Act (MHA) and public services." The SIM model is part of a 'High Intensity Network' (HIN) approach, which is now live in all south London boroughs. In this hub post, Steve Turner highlights the benefits and risks of this approach and seek your views on it. Background In 2018, SIM was selected for national scaling and spread across the Academic Health Science Networks (AHSNs). The High Intensity Network (HIN) has been working with the three south London Secondary Mental Health Trusts: The South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust and South West London and St George’s Mental Health NHS Trust, and the Metropolitan Police, London Ambulance Service, A&E, CCG commissioners, and the innovator and Network Director of the High Intensity Network. The model can be summarised as: A more integrated, informed, calm approach in the way we respond to individuals that have unique needs during a crisis and A better form of multi-skilled, personalised support after the crisis event is over. So in July 2013 the Serenity Integrated Mentoring (SIM) model of care was proposed. This is how it works: SIM brings together all the key urgent care agencies involved in responding to high-intensity crisis service users around the table, once a month. This multi-agency panel selects each individual based on demand/risk data and professional referrals. They use a national 5-point assessment process to ensure that the right clients are chosen and in a way where we can ensure a delicate balance between their rights as an individual but our need to safeguard. Selected individuals are then allocated to a SIM intervention team. The SIM team is led principally by a mental health professional (who leads clinically) and a police officer (who leads on behaviour, community safety, risk and impact). The team supports each patient, to better understand their crises and to identify healthier and safer ways to cope. In the most intensive, harmful or impactive cases, the team also does everything it can to prevent the need for criminal justice intervention. Together, the mental health clinician, the police officer and the service user together create a safer crisis plan that 999 responders can find and use 24 hours day. The crisis plan is then disseminated across the emergency services. The SIM team reinforces these plans by training, briefing and advising front line responders in how to use the plans and how to make confident, consistent, higher quality decisions. What are the benefits and risks of this approach? Benefits: It is claimed that this is a more integrated, calm and informed approach to responding to individuals in crisis and the HIN provides "better multi-skilled, personalised support after a crisis event was over". The HIN website states: "Across the UK, emergency and healthcare services respond every minute to people in mental health crisis and calls of this nature are increasing each year. But did you know that as much as 70% of this demand is caused by a small number of ‘high-intensity users’ who struggle with complex trauma and behavioural disorders? These disorders often expose the patient to higher levels of risk and harm and can simultaneously cause intensive demand on police, ambulance, A&E departments, and mental health crisis teams." Risks: This approach has been subject to strong criticism from some users of mental health services, mental health clinicians and mental health support organisations. Concerns have been raised about whether the HIN/SIM approach is safe, effective or appropriate. I believe we need an open and inclusive discussion about High Intensity Networks, with users of mental services leading the debate. As a former mental health nurse in an Assertive Outreach team I'm keen to learn: How users of services were involved in the initial development of the model? What are the similarities and differences between High Intensity Networks and an Assertive Outreach model? How this approach compares with approaches in other countries? How users of services are involved in evaluating and adapting the model? What the specific benefits are for users of services and are there any risks to this approach? Does this lead to a long term improvements for users of services? I hope people will feel able to contribute openly to this discussion, so we can learn together. #HighIntensityNetwork #mentalhealth