Marie Ward

A performance improvement case study in aircraft maintenance and its implications for hazard identification

Aircraft maintenance is a highly regulated, safety critical, complex and competitive industry. There is a need to develop innovative solutions to address process efficiency without compromising safety and quality. This paper presents the case that in order to improve a highly complex system such as aircraft maintenance, it is necessary to develop a comprehensive and ecologically valid model of the operational system, which represents not just what is meant to happen, but what normally happens. This model then provides the backdrop against which to change or improve the system. A performance report, the Blocker Report, specific to aircraft maintenance and related to the model was developed gathering data on anything that ‘blocks’ task or check performance. A Blocker Resolution Process was designed to resolve blockers and improve the current check system. Significant results were obtained for the company in the first trial and implications for safety management systems and hazard identification are discussed. Statement of Relevance: Aircraft maintenance is a safety critical, complex, competitive industry with a need to develop innovative solutions to address process and safety efficiency. This research addresses this through the development of a comprehensive and ecologically valid model of the system linked with a performance reporting and resolution system.

Collective leadership and safety cultures (Co-Lead): protocol for a mixed-methods pilot evaluation of the impact of a co-designed collective leadership intervention on team performance and safety culture in a hospital group in Ireland

Introduction There is accumulating evidence implicating the role of leadership in system failures that have resulted in a range of errors in healthcare, from misdiagnoses to failures to recognise and respond to patient deterioration. This has led to concerns about traditional hierarchical leadership structures and created an interest in the development of collective ways of working that distribute leadership roles and responsibilities across team members. Such collective leadership approaches have been associated with improved team performance and staff engagement. This research seeks to improve our understanding of collective leadership by addressing two specific issues: (1) Does collective leadership emerge organically (and in what forms) in a newly networked structure? and (2) Is it possible to design and implement collective leadership interventions that enable teams to collectively improve team performance and patient safety? Methods and analysis The first phase will include a social network analysis, using an online survey and semistructured interviews at three time points over 12 months, to document the frequency of contact and collaboration between senior hospital management staff in a recently configured hospital group. This study will explore how the network of 11 hospitals is operating and will assess whether collective leadership emerges organically. Second, collective leadership interventions will be co-designed during a series of workshops with healthcare staff, researchers and patient representatives, and then implemented and evaluated with four healthcare teams within the hospital network. A mixed-methods evaluation will explore the impact of the intervention on team effectiveness and team performance indicators to assess whether the intervention is suitable for wider roll-out and evaluation across the hospital group. Ethics and dissemination Favourable ethical opinion has been received from the University College Dublin Research Ethics Committee (HREC-LS-16–116397/LS-16-20). Results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals, national and international conferences, and to relevant stakeholders and interest groups.

An european approach to the integrated management of human factors in aircraft maintenance: introducing the IMMS

Previous research in aviation maintenance has highlighted the need to understand normal practice in order to advance the potential impact of Human Factors and bring aviation to a new safety level. What to do with this information then is crucial. What is presented here is an approach to do this, to use this information in such a way that it becomes key to safety and process improvement. This approach is currently being developed within the European funded HILAS project.

An introduction to the Emergency Department Adult Clinical Escalation protocol: ED-ACE

Purpose of the study This study demonstrates how a participatory action research approach was used to address the challenge of the early and effective detection of the deteriorating patient in the ED setting. The approach enabled a systematic approach to patient monitoring and escalation of care to be developed to address the wide-ranging spectrum of undifferentiated presentations and the phases of ED care from triage to patient admission. This paper presents a longitudinal patient monitoring system, which aims to provide monitoring and escalation of care, where necessary, of adult patients from triage to admission to hospital in a manner that is feasible in the unique ED environment. Methods An action research approach was taken to designing a longitudinal patient monitoring system appropriate for the ED. While the first draft protocol for post-triage monitoring and escalation was designed by a core research group, six clinical sites were included in iterative cycles of planning, action, reviewing and further planning. Reasons for refining the system at each site were collated and the protocol was adjusted accordingly before commencing the process at the next site. Results The ED Adult Clinical Escalation longitudinal patient monitoring system (ED-ACE) evolved through iterative cycles of design and testing to include: (1) a monitoring chart for adult patients; (2) a standardised approach to the monitoring and reassessment of patients after triage until they are assessed by a clinician; (3) the ISBAR (I=Identify, S=Situation, B=Background, A=Assessment, R=Recommendation) tool for interprofessional communication relating to clinical escalation; (4) a template for prescribing a patient-specific monitoring plan to be used by treating clinicians to guide patient monitoring from the time the patient is assessed until when they leave the ED and (5) a protocol for clinical escalation prompted by single physiological triggers and clinical concern. Conclusions This tool offers a link in the ‘Chain of Prevention’ between the Manchester Triage System and ward-based early warning scores taking account of the importance of standardisation, while being sufficiently adaptable for the unique working environment and patient population in the ED.

Using Co-Design to Develop a Collective Leadership Intervention for Healthcare Teams to Improve Safety Culture

While co-design methods are becoming more popular in healthcare; there is a gap within the peer-reviewed literature on how to do co-design in practice. This paper addresses this gap by delineating the approach taken in the co-design of a collective leadership intervention to improve healthcare team performance and patient safety culture. Over the course of six workshops healthcare staff, patient representatives and advocates, and health systems researchers collaboratively co-designed the intervention. The inputs to the process, exercises and activities that took place during the workshops and the outputs of the workshops are described. The co-design method, while challenging at times, had many benefits including grounding the intervention in the real-world experiences of healthcare teams. Implications of the method for health systems research are discussed.

Imbuing Medical Professionalism in Relation to Safety: A study protocol for a mixed-methods intervention focused on trialling an embedded learning approach that centres on the use of a custom designed board game

Introduction Healthcare organisations have a responsibility for ensuring that the governance of workplace settings creates a culture that supports good professional practice. Encouraging such a culture needs to start from an understanding of the factors that make it difficult for health professionals to raise issues of concern in relation to patient safety. The focus of this study is to determine whether a customised education intervention, developed as part of the study, with interns and senior house officers (SHOs) can imbue a culture of medical professionalism in relation to patient safety and support junior doctors to raise issues of concern, while shaping a culture of responsiveness and learning. Methods and analysis We will use quantitative and qualitative methods to collect data. The sample size will be approximately 200 interns and SHOs across the two hospital sites. Two surveys will be included with one measuring leadership inclusiveness and psychological safety and a second capturing information on safety concerns that participants may have witnessed in their places of work. The PlayDecide embedded learning intervention will be developed with key stakeholders. This will be trialled in the middle stage of data collection for both interns and SHOs. A detailed content analysis will be conducted on the surveys to assess any changes in reporting following the PlayDecide intervention. This will be compared with the incident reporting levels and the results of the preintervention and postintervention leadership inclusiveness and psychological safety survey. Statistical analysis will be conducted using SPSS. Differences will be considered statistically significant at p<0.05. Semistructured interviews using a critical incident technique will be used for the ongoing analysis and evaluation of the project. These will be transcribed, de-identified and coded into themes. Ethics and dissemination The study has been granted ethics approval from University College Dublin (Ref. LS-15–19-Ward-McAuliffe: Imbuing Medical Professionalism in Relation to Safety). The study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications.

Achieving impact in ergonomic research.

People are central to system functioning and this role has been dramatically extended by new information technology. This makes possible the fundamental transformation of processes across systems of systems. Can Ergonomics research play an effective role in systems integration innovation? To have real world impact on such problems the system of R and D needs to sustain strong designs that address the functionality of socio-technical systems and support the implementation of innovations, taking into account the complexity of change, the importance of values of dignity and trust, and creating a common understanding amongst all stakeholders to enable design for operations. Strong research designs are more expensive, difficult, risky and prolonged than more commonly practiced weaker designs. They require active engagement with the industrial or service provider and involve overcoming cultural and other barriers to effective implementation and change. To create a virtuous cycle of research-generated impact it is necessary for strong designs to be well supported in the research community and for real world impact to be central to performance criteria of research excellence. Unfortunately neither of these criteria appear to be fulfilled. To ameliorate this, deficiencies in the full cycle of systems integration innovation need to be addressed.

Effectiveness of early assessment and intervention by interdisciplinary teams including health and social care professionals in the emergency department: protocol for a systematic review

Introduction Finding cost-effective strategies to improve patient care in the emergency department (ED) is an increasing imperative given growing numbers of ED attendees. Encouraging evidence indicates that interdisciplinary teams including health and social care professionals (HSCPs) enhance patient care across a variety of healthcare settings. However, to date no systematic reviews of the effectiveness of early assessment and/or interventions carried by such teams in the ED exist. This systematic review aims to explore the impact of early assessment and/or intervention carried out by interdisciplinary teams including HSCPs in the ED on the quality, safety and cost-effectiveness of care, and to define the content of the assessment and/or intervention offered by HSCPs. Methods and analysis Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standardised guidelines, we will conduct a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, controlled before–after studies, interrupted time series and repeated measures studies that report the impact of early assessment and/or intervention provided to adults aged 18+ by interdisciplinary teams including HSCPs in the ED. Searches will be carried in Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, Cochrane Library and MEDLINE from inception to March 2018. We will also hand-search the reference lists of relevant studies. Following a two-step screening process, two independent reviewers will extract data on the type of population, intervention, comparison, outcomes and study design. The quality of the studies will be appraised using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. The findings will be synthesised in a narrative summary, and a meta-analysis will be conducted where appropriate. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval will not be sought since it is not required for systematic reviews. The results of this review will be disseminated through publication in a peer-review journal and presented at relevant conferences. Trial registration number CRD42018091794.

Team interventions in acute hospital contexts: a systematic search of the literature using realist synthesis

BackgroundResearch on team effectiveness in healthcare has focussed on whether effective teams yield positive outcomes for patients and on the effectiveness of team interventions to improve performance. Limited understanding exists of what works for whom within an effective team, or how and why the context in which the team operates enables team members both as individuals and as a collective to enact behaviours that promote positive outcomes.MethodsThis realist synthesis of the literature explores the relationship between team interventions, underlying teamwork mechanisms generated by those interventions, and the resultant impact on patient outcomes in an acute hospital context. A systematic search of five healthcare and healthcare management academic databases: PubMed, PsychINFO, CINAHL, ABInform, Emerald Management and three grey literature databases: ERIC, OpenDOAR and Open Grey was undertaken. Five experts in the field were also contacted to source relevant literature. Using PRISMA guidelines, relevant studies published between January 2006 and January 2017 were systematically searched by a team of three people. Drawing on realist methodology, data were synthesised using context, mechanism and outcome configurations as the unit of analysis to identify enablers and barriers to effective team interventions.ResultsOut of 3347 papers retrieved, 18 were included in the final synthesis. From these, five contextual enablers were identified: an inter-disciplinary focus and flattened hierarchy; effective communication; leadership support and alignment of team goals with organisational goals; credibility of intervention; and appropriate team composition with physician involvement. Ten recurring mechanisms were identified, the most frequently occurring of which was shared responsibility.ConclusionsThe advantage of using realist synthesis to extrapolate data from the literature is that it considers the context and mechanisms that will impact effectiveness of healthcare team interventions. This methodological approach provides a different perspective to other types of syntheses and offers insight as to why certain contextual elements may yield more success than others. Findings therefore tend to have more practical implications. Specificity of detail in terms of how external drivers impact on healthcare team interventions was limited in the articles extracted for analysis. This broader perspective is therefore an important consideration for future research.

Study protocol for evaluating the implementation and effectiveness of an emergency department longitudinal patient monitoring system using a mixed-methods approach

BackgroundEarly detection of patient deterioration is a key element of patient safety as it allows timely clinical intervention and potential rescue, thus reducing the risks of serious patient safety incidents. Longitudinal patient monitoring systems have been widely recommended for use to detect clinical deterioration. However, there is conflicting evidence on whether they improve patient outcomes. This may in part be related to variation in the rigour with which they are implemented and evaluated. This study aims to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of a longitudinal patient monitoring system designed for adult patients in the unique environment of the Emergency Department (ED).MethodsA novel participatory action research (PAR) approach is taken where socio-technical systems (STS) theory and analysis informs the implementation through the improvement methodology of ‘Plan Do Study Act’ (PDSA) cycles. We hypothesise that conducting an STS analysis of the ED before beginning the PDSA cycles will provide for a much richer understanding of the current situation and possible challenges to implementing the ED-specific longitudinal patient monitoring system. This methodology will enable both a process and an outcome evaluation of implementing the ED-specific longitudinal patient monitoring system. Process evaluations can help distinguish between interventions that have inherent faults and those that are badly executed.DiscussionOver 1.2 million patients attend EDs annually in Ireland; the successful implementation of an ED-specific longitudinal patient monitoring system has the potential to affect the care of a significant number of such patients. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study combining PAR, STS and multiple PDSA cycles to evaluate the implementation of an ED-specific longitudinal patient monitoring system and to determine (through process and outcome evaluation) whether this system can significantly improve patient outcomes by early detection and appropriate intervention for patients at risk of clinical deterioration.