Cargando…

Process evaluation of the effects of patient safety auditing in hospital care (part 2)

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that explain the observed effects of internal auditing on improving patient safety. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A process evaluation study within eight departments of a university medical centre in the Netherlands. INTERVENTION(S): Internal auditing and feedback f...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hanskamp-Sebregts, Mirelle, Zegers, Marieke, Boeijen, Wilma, Wollersheim, Hub, van Gurp, Petra J, Westert, Gert P
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6819993/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30137381
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzy173
_version_ 1783463855212462080
author Hanskamp-Sebregts, Mirelle
Zegers, Marieke
Boeijen, Wilma
Wollersheim, Hub
van Gurp, Petra J
Westert, Gert P
author_facet Hanskamp-Sebregts, Mirelle
Zegers, Marieke
Boeijen, Wilma
Wollersheim, Hub
van Gurp, Petra J
Westert, Gert P
author_sort Hanskamp-Sebregts, Mirelle
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that explain the observed effects of internal auditing on improving patient safety. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A process evaluation study within eight departments of a university medical centre in the Netherlands. INTERVENTION(S): Internal auditing and feedback for improving patient safety in hospital care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Experiences with patient safety auditing, percentage implemented improvement actions tailored to the audit results and perceived factors that hindered or facilitated the implementation of improvement actions. RESULTS: The respondents had positive audit experiences, with the exception of the amount of preparatory work by departments. Fifteen months after the audit visit, 21% of the intended improvement actions based on the audit results were completely implemented. Factors that hindered implementation were short implementation time: 9 months (range 5–11 months) instead of the 15 months’ planned implementation time; time-consuming and labour-intensive implementation of improvement actions; and limited organizational support for quality improvement (e.g. insufficient staff capacity and time, no available quality improvement data and information and communication technological (ICT) support). CONCLUSIONS: A well-constructed analysis and feedback of patient safety problems is insufficient to reduce the occurrence of poor patient safety outcomes. Without focus and support in the implementation of audit-based improvement actions, quality improvement by patient safety auditing will remain limited.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6819993
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68199932019-11-04 Process evaluation of the effects of patient safety auditing in hospital care (part 2) Hanskamp-Sebregts, Mirelle Zegers, Marieke Boeijen, Wilma Wollersheim, Hub van Gurp, Petra J Westert, Gert P Int J Qual Health Care Research Article OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that explain the observed effects of internal auditing on improving patient safety. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A process evaluation study within eight departments of a university medical centre in the Netherlands. INTERVENTION(S): Internal auditing and feedback for improving patient safety in hospital care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Experiences with patient safety auditing, percentage implemented improvement actions tailored to the audit results and perceived factors that hindered or facilitated the implementation of improvement actions. RESULTS: The respondents had positive audit experiences, with the exception of the amount of preparatory work by departments. Fifteen months after the audit visit, 21% of the intended improvement actions based on the audit results were completely implemented. Factors that hindered implementation were short implementation time: 9 months (range 5–11 months) instead of the 15 months’ planned implementation time; time-consuming and labour-intensive implementation of improvement actions; and limited organizational support for quality improvement (e.g. insufficient staff capacity and time, no available quality improvement data and information and communication technological (ICT) support). CONCLUSIONS: A well-constructed analysis and feedback of patient safety problems is insufficient to reduce the occurrence of poor patient safety outcomes. Without focus and support in the implementation of audit-based improvement actions, quality improvement by patient safety auditing will remain limited. Oxford University Press 2019-07 2018-08-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6819993/ /pubmed/30137381 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzy173 Text en © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Research Article
Hanskamp-Sebregts, Mirelle
Zegers, Marieke
Boeijen, Wilma
Wollersheim, Hub
van Gurp, Petra J
Westert, Gert P
Process evaluation of the effects of patient safety auditing in hospital care (part 2)
title Process evaluation of the effects of patient safety auditing in hospital care (part 2)
title_full Process evaluation of the effects of patient safety auditing in hospital care (part 2)
title_fullStr Process evaluation of the effects of patient safety auditing in hospital care (part 2)
title_full_unstemmed Process evaluation of the effects of patient safety auditing in hospital care (part 2)
title_short Process evaluation of the effects of patient safety auditing in hospital care (part 2)
title_sort process evaluation of the effects of patient safety auditing in hospital care (part 2)
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6819993/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30137381
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzy173
work_keys_str_mv AT hanskampsebregtsmirelle processevaluationoftheeffectsofpatientsafetyauditinginhospitalcarepart2
AT zegersmarieke processevaluationoftheeffectsofpatientsafetyauditinginhospitalcarepart2
AT boeijenwilma processevaluationoftheeffectsofpatientsafetyauditinginhospitalcarepart2
AT wollersheimhub processevaluationoftheeffectsofpatientsafetyauditinginhospitalcarepart2
AT vangurppetraj processevaluationoftheeffectsofpatientsafetyauditinginhospitalcarepart2
AT westertgertp processevaluationoftheeffectsofpatientsafetyauditinginhospitalcarepart2