» Articles » PMID: 38902021

Understanding the Enablers and Barriers to Implementing a Patient-led Escalation System: a Qualitative Study

Overview
Journal BMJ Qual Saf
Specialty Health Services
Date 2024 Jun 20
PMID 38902021
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The management of acute deterioration following surgery remains highly variable. Patients and families can play an important role in identifying early signs of deterioration but effective contribution to escalation of care can be practically difficult to achieve. This paper reports the enablers and barriers to the implementation of patient-led escalation systems found during a process evaluation of a quality improvement programme Rescue for Emergency Surgery Patients Observed to uNdergo acute Deterioration (RESPOND).

Methods: The research used ethnographic methods, including over 100 hours of observations on surgical units in three English hospitals in order to understand the everyday context of care. Observations focused on the coordination of activities such as handovers and how rescue featured as part of this. We also conducted 27 interviews with a range of clinical and managerial staff and patients. We employed a thematic analysis approach, combined with a theoretically focused implementation coding framework, based on Normalisation Process Theory.

Results: We found that organisational infrastructural support in the form of a leadership support and clinical care outreach teams with capacity were enablers in implementing the patient-led escalation system. Barriers to implementation included making changes to professional practice without discussing the value and legitimacy of operationalising patient concerns, and ensuring equity of use. We found that organisational work is needed to overcome patient fears about disrupting social and cultural norms.

Conclusions: This paper reveals the need for infrastructural support to facilitate the implementation of a patient-led escalation system, and leadership support to normalise the everyday process of involving patients and families in escalation. This type of system may not achieve its goals without properly understanding and addressing the concerns of both nurses and patients.

References
1.
Cresham Fox S, Taylor N, Marufu T, Hendron E, Manning J . Paediatric family activated rapid response interventions; qualitative systematic review. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2022; 75:103363. DOI: 10.1016/j.iccn.2022.103363. View

2.
Raymond J, Kyzer B, Copper T, Stephens K, Oldendick R, Coker D . South Carolina patient safety legislation: the impact of the Lewis Blackman Hospital Patient Safety Act on a large teaching hospital. J S C Med Assoc. 2009; 105(1):12-5. View

3.
Bucknall T, Quinney R, Booth L, McKinney A, Subbe C, Odell M . When patients (and families) raise the alarm: Patient and family activated rapid response as a safety strategy for hospitals. Future Healthc J. 2021; 8(3):e609-e612. PMC: 8651329. DOI: 10.7861/fhj.2021-0134. View

4.
Geerligs L, Rankin N, Shepherd H, Butow P . Hospital-based interventions: a systematic review of staff-reported barriers and facilitators to implementation processes. Implement Sci. 2018; 13(1):36. PMC: 5824580. DOI: 10.1186/s13012-018-0726-9. View

5.
Entwistle V, McCaughan D, Watt I, Birks Y, Hall J, Peat M . Speaking up about safety concerns: multi-setting qualitative study of patients' views and experiences. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010; 19(6):e33. DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2009.039743. View