Cargando…
Comparing the Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop with an established incident reporting system: Study protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial
BACKGROUND: Incident reporting is widely used in hospitals to improve patient safety, but current reporting systems do not function optimally. The utility of incident reports is limited because hospital staff may not know what to report, may fear retaliation, and may doubt whether administrators wil...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10393596/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37538195 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2023.101192 |
_version_ | 1785083194575421440 |
---|---|
author | Berdahl, Carl T. Henreid, Andrew J. Cohen, Tara N. Coleman, Bernice L. Seferian, Edward G. Leang, Donna Kim, Sungjin Diniz, Marcio A. Grissinger, Matthew Kaiser, Karen McCleskey, Sara Zhu, Xi Nuckols, Teryl K. |
author_facet | Berdahl, Carl T. Henreid, Andrew J. Cohen, Tara N. Coleman, Bernice L. Seferian, Edward G. Leang, Donna Kim, Sungjin Diniz, Marcio A. Grissinger, Matthew Kaiser, Karen McCleskey, Sara Zhu, Xi Nuckols, Teryl K. |
author_sort | Berdahl, Carl T. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Incident reporting is widely used in hospitals to improve patient safety, but current reporting systems do not function optimally. The utility of incident reports is limited because hospital staff may not know what to report, may fear retaliation, and may doubt whether administrators will review reports and respond effectively. METHODS: This is a clustered randomized controlled trial of the Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop, an intervention designed to transform hospital incident reporting systems into effective tools for improving patient safety. The SAFE Loop has six key attributes: obtaining nurses' input about which safety problems to prioritize on their unit; focusing on learning about selected high-priority events; training nurses to write more informative event reports; prompting nurses to report high-priority events; integrating information about events from multiple sources; and providing feedback to nurses on findings and mitigation plans. The study will focus on medication errors and randomize 20 nursing units at a large academic/community hospital in Los Angeles. Outcomes include: (1) incident reporting practices (rates of high-priority reports, contributing factors described in reports), (2) nurses' attitudes toward incident reporting, and (3) rates of high-priority events. Quantitative analyses will compare changes in outcomes pre- and post-implementation between the intervention and control nursing units, and qualitative analyses will explore nurses’ experiences with implementation. CONCLUSION: If effective, SAFE Loop will have several benefits: increasing nurses’ engagement with reporting, producing more informative reports, enabling safety leaders to understand problems, designing system-based solutions more effectively, and lowering rates of high-priority patient safety events. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10393596 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103935962023-08-03 Comparing the Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop with an established incident reporting system: Study protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial Berdahl, Carl T. Henreid, Andrew J. Cohen, Tara N. Coleman, Bernice L. Seferian, Edward G. Leang, Donna Kim, Sungjin Diniz, Marcio A. Grissinger, Matthew Kaiser, Karen McCleskey, Sara Zhu, Xi Nuckols, Teryl K. Contemp Clin Trials Commun Article BACKGROUND: Incident reporting is widely used in hospitals to improve patient safety, but current reporting systems do not function optimally. The utility of incident reports is limited because hospital staff may not know what to report, may fear retaliation, and may doubt whether administrators will review reports and respond effectively. METHODS: This is a clustered randomized controlled trial of the Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop, an intervention designed to transform hospital incident reporting systems into effective tools for improving patient safety. The SAFE Loop has six key attributes: obtaining nurses' input about which safety problems to prioritize on their unit; focusing on learning about selected high-priority events; training nurses to write more informative event reports; prompting nurses to report high-priority events; integrating information about events from multiple sources; and providing feedback to nurses on findings and mitigation plans. The study will focus on medication errors and randomize 20 nursing units at a large academic/community hospital in Los Angeles. Outcomes include: (1) incident reporting practices (rates of high-priority reports, contributing factors described in reports), (2) nurses' attitudes toward incident reporting, and (3) rates of high-priority events. Quantitative analyses will compare changes in outcomes pre- and post-implementation between the intervention and control nursing units, and qualitative analyses will explore nurses’ experiences with implementation. CONCLUSION: If effective, SAFE Loop will have several benefits: increasing nurses’ engagement with reporting, producing more informative reports, enabling safety leaders to understand problems, designing system-based solutions more effectively, and lowering rates of high-priority patient safety events. Elsevier 2023-07-18 /pmc/articles/PMC10393596/ /pubmed/37538195 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2023.101192 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Berdahl, Carl T. Henreid, Andrew J. Cohen, Tara N. Coleman, Bernice L. Seferian, Edward G. Leang, Donna Kim, Sungjin Diniz, Marcio A. Grissinger, Matthew Kaiser, Karen McCleskey, Sara Zhu, Xi Nuckols, Teryl K. Comparing the Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop with an established incident reporting system: Study protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial |
title | Comparing the Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop with an established incident reporting system: Study protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial |
title_full | Comparing the Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop with an established incident reporting system: Study protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Comparing the Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop with an established incident reporting system: Study protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparing the Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop with an established incident reporting system: Study protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial |
title_short | Comparing the Safety Action Feedback and Engagement (SAFE) Loop with an established incident reporting system: Study protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial |
title_sort | comparing the safety action feedback and engagement (safe) loop with an established incident reporting system: study protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10393596/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37538195 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2023.101192 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT berdahlcarlt comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT henreidandrewj comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT cohentaran comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT colemanbernicel comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT seferianedwardg comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT leangdonna comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT kimsungjin comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT dinizmarcioa comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT grissingermatthew comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT kaiserkaren comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT mccleskeysara comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT zhuxi comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT nuckolsterylk comparingthesafetyactionfeedbackandengagementsafeloopwithanestablishedincidentreportingsystemstudyprotocolforapragmaticclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial |