Natalie Hannaford

CareTrack: Assessing the appropriateness of health care delivery in Australia

Objective: To determine the percentage of health care encounters at which a sample of adult Australians received appropriate care (ie, care in line with evidence‐based or consensus‐based guidelines).

Failures in transition: learning from incidents relating to clinical handover in acute care.

&NA; The appropriate handover of patients, whereby responsibility and accountability of care is transferred between healthcare providers, is a critical component of quality healthcare delivery. This paper examines data from recent incidents relating to clinical handover in acute care settings, in order to provide a basis for the design and implementation of preventive and corrective strategies. A sample of incidents (n = 459) relating to clinical handover was extracted from an Australian health services incident reporting system using a manual search function. Incident narratives were subjected to classification according to the system safety and quality concepts of failure type, error type, and failure detection mechanism. The most prevalent failure types associated with clinical handover were those relating to the transfer of patients without adequate handover 28.8% (n = 132), omissions of critical information about the patients condition 19.2% (n = 88), and omissions of critical information about the patients care plan during the handover process 14.2% (n = 65). The most prevalent failure detection mechanisms were those of expectation mismatch 35.7% (n = 174), clinical mismatch 26.9% (n = 127), and mismatch with other documentation 24.0% (n = 117). The findings suggest the need for a structured approach to handover with a recording of standardized sets of information to ensure that critical components are not omitted. Limitations of existing reporting processes are also highlighted.

Learning from incident reports in the Australian medical imaging setting: handover and communication errors

OBJECTIVE To determine the type and nature of incidents occurring within medical imaging settings in Australia and identify strategies that could be engaged to reduce the risk of their re-occurrence. METHODS 71 search terms, related to clinical handover and communication, were applied to 3976 incidents in the Radiology Events Register. Detailed classification and thematic analysis of a subset of incidents that involved handover or communication (n=298) were undertaken to identify the most prevalent types of error and to make recommendations about patient safety initiatives in medical imaging. RESULTS Incidents occurred most frequently during patient preparation (34%), when requesting imaging (27%) and when communicating a diagnosis (23%). Frequent problems within each of these stages of the imaging cycle included: inadequate handover of patients (41%) or unsafe or inappropriate transfer of the patient to or from medical imaging (35%); incorrect information on the request form (52%); and delayed communication of a diagnosis (36%) or communication of a wrong diagnosis (36%). CONCLUSION The handover of patients and clinical information to and from medical imaging is fraught with error, often compromising patient safety and resulting in communication of delayed or wrong diagnoses, unnecessary radiation exposure and a waste of limited resources. Corrective strategies to address safety concerns related to new information technologies, patient transfer and inadequate test result notification policies are relevant to all healthcare settings. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE Handover and communication errors are prevalent in medical imaging. System-wide changes that facilitate effective communication are required.

Towards the delivery of appropriate health care in Australia.

The Medical Journal of Australia ISSN: 0025-729X 16 July 2012 197 2 78-4 ©The Medical Journal of Australia 2012 www.mja.com.au Perspective For CareTrack, ethics approval had to be obtained fr more than 220 health care f cilities or providers. Altho there is a National Ethics Application Form, each hum research ethics committee equired site-specific information or consent, or both, with changes to documentation needed to satisfy local requirements. Approval sometimes required full review by a commit A challenging proposal draws on the lessons learnt from the CareTrack study to pave the way towards better health care

Health system frameworks and performance indicators in eight countries: A comparative international analysis:

Objectives: Performance indicators are a popular mechanism for measuring the quality of healthcare to facilitate both quality improvement and systems management. Few studies make comparative assessments of different countries’ performance indicator frameworks. This study identifies and compares frameworks and performance indicators used in selected Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development health systems to measure and report on the performance of healthcare organisations and local health systems. Countries involved are Australia, Canada, Denmark, England, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Scotland and the United States. Methods: Identification of comparable international indicators and analyses of their characteristics and of their broader national frameworks and contexts were undertaken. Two dimensions of indicators – that they are nationally consistent (used across the country rather than just regionally) and locally relevant (measured and reported publicly at a local level, for example, a health service) – were deemed important. Results: The most commonly used domains in performance frameworks were safety, effectiveness and access. The search found 401 indicators that fulfilled the ‘nationally consistent and locally relevant’ criteria. Of these, 45 indicators are reported in more than one country. Cardiovascular, surgery and mental health were the most frequently reported disease groups. Conclusion: These comparative data inform researchers and policymakers internationally when designing health performance frameworks and indicator sets.

Assessing the appropriateness of prevention and management of venous thromboembolism in Australia: a cross-sectional study

Objectives The prevention and management of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is often at variance with guidelines. The CareTrack Australia (CTA) study reported that appropriate care (in line with evidence-based or consensus-based guidelines) is being provided for VTE at just over half of eligible encounters. The aim of this paper is to present and discuss the detailed CTA findings for VTE as a baseline for compliance with guidelines at a population level. Setting The setting was 27 hospitals in 2 states of Australia. Participants A sample of participants designed to be representative of the Australian population was recruited. Participants who had been admitted overnight during 2009 and/or 2010 were eligible. Of the 1154 CTA participants, 481(42%) were admitted overnight to hospital at least once, comprising 751 admissions. There were 279 females (58%), and the mean age was 64 years. Primary and secondary outcome measures The primary measure was compliance with indicators of appropriate care for VTE. The indicators were extracted from Australian VTE clinical practice guidelines and ratified by experts. Participants’ medical records from 2009 to 2010 were analysed for compliance with 38 VTE indicators. Results Of the 35 145 CTA encounters, 1078 (3%) were eligible for scoring against VTE indicators. There were 2–84 eligible encounters per indicator at 27 hospitals. Overall compliance with indicators for VTE was 51%, and ranged from 34% to 64% for aggregated sets of indicators. Conclusions The prevention and management of VTE was appropriate for only half of the at-risk patients in our sample; this provides a baseline for tracking progress nationally. There is a need for national and, ideally, international agreement on clinical standards, indicators and tools to guide, document and monitor care for VTE, and for measures to increase their uptake, particularly where deficiencies have been identified.

Care Track: Towards Appropriate Care for Low Back Pain.

Study Design. Retrospective medical record review to assess compliance with low back pain (LBP) care indicators. Objective. To establish baseline estimates of the appropriateness of LBP care in the general Australian population provided by a range of healthcare providers in various real-world settings. Summary of Background Data. LBP is a costly condition and accounts for the greatest burden of disease worldwide, yet the care provided is often at variance with guidelines. No baseline estimates of performance are currently available in Australia across various aspects of LBP care, practitioners, and settings. Methods. A population-based sample of patients with 22 common conditions was recruited by telephone; consents were obtained to review their medical records against indicators (“CareTrack”). Care for LBP was reviewed against 10 indicators used in a previous study and ratified by experts as representing appropriate LBP care in Australia during 2009 and 2010. Results. Of the 22 CareTrack conditions, LBP had the highest number of eligible healthcare encounters (6588 of 35,573, 19%), 125 to 884 per indicator among 164 LBP patients. Overall compliance with LBP indicators was 72% (range 42%–98%). Allied health practitioners and hospitals were the most compliant (82%–83% respectively), followed by general practitioners (54%). Some aspects of care were poor, such as documenting a thorough neurological examination, screening for serious diseases such as infection and inappropriate use of drugs such as steroids and treatments such as traction. Conclusion. Over a quarter of LBP care was not appropriate despite the availability of guidelines. There is a need for national and, potentially, international agreement on clinical standards, indicators and tools to guide, document and monitor the appropriateness of care for LBP, and for measures to increase their uptake, particularly where deficiencies have been identified. Level of Evidence: N /A