This article discusses the prevalence of disruptive behavior in the healthcare setting, which is defined as any act that influences a group’s intended outcome. Disruptive behavior often takes the form of angry outbursts and passive aggressive actions, especially in extremely stressful environments, such as emergency rooms. This behavior is often detrimental to the culture of safety and quality healthcare, as well as increases the risk of lawsuits. To combat disruptive behavior, five principles are are offered as guides to promoting professionalism and professional accountability in support of quality team-oriented care, patient safety and, if necessary, legal defense if disruptive colleagues challenge disciplinary interventions. 

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) is the lead Federal agency charged with improving the safety and quality of America’s health care system. AHRQ develops the knowledge, tools, and data needed to improve the health care system and help Americans, health care professionals, and policymakers make informed health decisions.

This article explains the challenge of balancing accountability and a “no blame” model in healthcare systems when promoting patient safety. Accountability is defined as taking responsibility for one’s actions. In this article, it is taking responsibility for malpractice that increases patient harm. the “no blame” model is defined as not accusing a single entity for any healthcare misconduct. It is important for healthcare systems to embody both taking responsibility for healthcare malpractices as well as the “no blame” model to effectively promote patient safety and quality and reduce adverse health events.

Webinar Date: July 15, 2021

Presenters: 

• Jo Shapiro, MD, FACS, Associate professor of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery at Harvard Medical School; Principle Faculty for the Center for Medical Simulation in Boston; Consultant for the Massachusetts General Hospital Department of Anesthesia, Pain and Critical Care
• Allan Frankel, MD, Chief Executive Officer, Safe & Reliable Healthcare

Learning Objectives:

• Identify conflicting notions of success and failure regarding CRPs
• Discuss the relationship between incomplete CRP implementation and irregular application of CRPs
• Describe lessons learned from unsuccessful applications of CRPs to individual events

Large Scale Implementation of Communication and Resolution Programs

Presented by: Heather Gocke, M.S., RNC-OB, CPHRM, C-EFM

Webinar Date: January 29, 2020

Ms. Gocke introduces a comprehensive program and a holistic approach in reducing harm in healthcare through large scale implementation of CRP. In her presentation, she highlights the importance of disclosure and engagement, and she shares real-life challenges and secrets to success.

Learning Objectives:

1. Outline the method used to engage member sites in culture transformation
2. Learn  how culture measurement, survey data debriefs, and cognitive interviewing techniques are used to inform this body of work
3. Introduce the five domains and components of BETA HEART

From the Canadian Patient Safety Institute

Prevent Patient Safety Incidents and Minimize Harm When They Do Occur
When a patient’s safety is compromised, or even if someone just comes close to having an incident, you need to know you are taking the right measures to address it, now and in the future. CPSI provides you with practical strategies and resources to manage incidents effectively and keep your patients safe. This integrated toolkit considers the needs and concerns of patients and their families, and how to properly engage them throughout the process.

Drawn from the best available evidence and expert advice, this newly designed toolkit is for those responsible for managing patient safety, quality improvement, risk management, and staff training in any healthcare setting.

This article explains how healthcare providers and insurers were skeptical of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s Communication (AHQR) Communication and Optimal Resolution (CANDOR) toolkit, which is a guide for healthcare providers to use if there was patient injury. Healthcare providers and insurers are weary of the CANDOR toolkit, since it does not quickly fix litigation scandals. This toolkit also does not effectively identify patient safety risks. However, the CANDOR toolkit is an effective step for healthcare providers to take in being honest and transparent with their patients about any malpractice or increased risk of injury.

Among patients with chest pain, the implementation of a comprehensive communication-and-resolution program was associated with substantially reduced growth rates in the use of diagnostic testing and imaging services. Further research is needed to establish to what extent these changes were attributable to the program and clinically appropriate.

The rapid rate of change in the world of management continues to escalate. New government regulations, new products, growth, increased competition, technological developments, and an evolving workforce compel organizations to undertake at least moderate change on a regular basis. Yet few major changes are greeted with open arms by employers and employees; they often result in protracted transitions, deadened morale, emotional upheaval, and the costly dedication of managerial time. Kotter and Schlesinger help calm the chaos by identifying four basic reasons why people resist change and offering various methods for overcoming resistance.

In communication-and-resolution programs (CRPs), health systems and liability insurers encourage the disclosure of unanticipated care outcomes to affected patients and proactively seek resolutions, including offering an apology, an explanation, and, where appropriate, reimbursement or compensation. Anecdotal reports from the University of Michigan Health System and other early adopters of CRPs suggest that these programs can substantially reduce liability costs and improve patient safety. In this study, CRP participants were interviewed. They identified several factors that contributed to their programs’ success, including the presence of a strong institutional champion and investing in building and marketing the program to skeptical clinicians.

The Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program (CUSP) was created by Johns Hopkins University patient safety researchers and brought to the public domain through the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). CUSP aims to improve patient safety culture while providing front line caregivers with the tools and support that they need to tackle the hazards that threaten their patients. This program has been used to target a wide range of problems, such as patient falls, hospital-acquired infections, and medication administration errors.

The AHRQ toolkit includes training tools to make care safer by improving the foundation of how your physicians, nurses, and other clinical team members work together. It builds the capacity to address safety issues by combining clinical best practices and the science of safety.

The existing structures and processes that together form an organization’s operating system need an additional element to address the challenges produced by mounting complexity and rapid change. The solution is a second operating system, devoted to the design and implementation of strategy, that uses an agile, network-like structure and a very different set of processes. The new operating system continually assesses the business, the industry, and the organization, and reacts with greater agility, speed, and creativity than the existing one. It complements rather than overburdens the traditional hierarchy, thus freeing the latter to do what it’s optimized to do. It actually makes enterprises easier to run and accelerates strategic change. This is not an “either or” idea. It’s “both and.” I’m proposing two systems that operate in concert.

The Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) and the National Patient Safety Foundation (NPSF) started collaborating together to utilize its combined resources and knowledge to further  patient safety efforts and create safety systems in various healthcare settings.

This article discusses that just culture is balance between holding organizations and individuals accountable for implementing safe practices and change in the workplace. This is especially important in healthcare settings to decrease patient mortality and increase patient safety. Benefits of fostering a just culture include increasing effective communication and innovation across various departments.

Sidney Dekker, PhD supervises the Safety Science Innovation Lab at Griffith University in Brisbane, Australia. In Dekker’s book, Just Culture: Restoring Trust and Accountability in Your Organization (3rd ed.), he discusses how to effectively create a just culture of accountability and responsibility. This includes learning strategies on how to appropriately approach adverse incidents such that knowledge is maximized and the negative effects are minimized.

John P. Kotter is renowned for his work on leading organizational change. In 1995, when this article was first published, he had just completed a ten-year study of more than 100 companies that attempted such a transformation. Here he shares the results of his observations, outlining the eight largest errors that can doom these efforts and explaining the general lessons that encourage success.

Inconsistent CRP implementation and focus on claims savings rather than nurturing a culture of accountability results to missed opportunities for improving quality and safety. The article includes four suggested strategies for implementing and spreading authentic CRPs.

The University of Michigan Health System (UMHS) systematically adopted the “open disclosure with offer” model, a principle-based strategy that emphasizes honesty and disclosure, to effectively respond to adverse patient outcomes and healthcare malpractices. When the UMHS adoped this model, there was a gradual reduction in litigation fees and the number of malpractice and patient harm claims.

Previous studies suggest that psychologically safe workplaces foster a feeling of comfort among employees, allowing them to feel comfortable with taking risks, such as identifying mistakes in the workplace. In this study, researchers analyzed the levels of psychological safety in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospitals, and studied its relationship to employees’ comfort in disclosing medical mistakes. Researchers found that only a minority of workers were uncomfortable in admitting mistakes, and their discomfort was due to fear of retaliation.

This white paper introduces an overall approach and tools designed to support two processes: the proactive preparation of a plan for managing serious clinical adverse events, and the reactive emergency response of an organization that has no such plan.

Every day, clinical adverse events occur within our health care system, causing physical and psychological harm to one or more patients, their families, staff (including medical staff), the community, and the organization. In the crisis that often emerges, what differentiates organizations, positively or negatively, is their culture of safety, the role of the board of trustees and executive leadership, advanced planning for such an event, the balanced prioritization of the needs of the patient and family, staff, and organization, and how actions immediately and over time bring empathy, support, resolution, learning, and improvement. The risks of not responding to these adverse events in a timely and effective manner are significant, and include loss of trust, absence of healing, no learning and improvement, the sending of mixed messages about what is really important to the organization, increased likelihood of regulatory action or lawsuits, and challenges by the media.

The paper includes three tools for leaders (as appendices) — a Checklist, a Work Plan, and a Disclosure Culture Assessment Tool — and numerous resources to guide practice. The three tools are also included below as individual documents for ease of use.

The 2011 (second edition) update reflects a number of suggested improvements and clarifications, including new content on reimbursement and compensation as part of any discussion of disclosure and resolution, and disclosure of errors that have occurred at another institution, among other updates. Additional citations, resources, and examples from organizations mounting effective crisis responses are also included.

Sidney Dekker, the author of Second Victim: Error, Guilt, Trauma, and Resilience, discusses how healthcare professionals are considered second victims in medical mishaps, because of the trauma and guilt they experience int the wake of these incidents. In his book, Dekker details efficient ways to investigate medically adverse events so that healthcare professionals do not feel neglected or more guilty in the process. Dekker also emphasizes the importance of having support systems in healthcare settings for second victims.

Dr. Atul Gawande, general surgeon and part-time professor at Harvard University, analyzed the histories of various medical innovations, such as anesthesia and oral re-hydration therapy, and why they were successful or unsuccessful in swift diffusion. General obstacles included resistance from healthcare professionals, as well as weariness that the method was unsuccessful. However, general reasons why other methods were successful was because they combat the negative effects of germs and pain.

Authors of this article discuss how hard factors act as obstacles in change management. Hard factors have three characteristics: 1) Corporations can measure them in implicit and explicit ways, 2) corporations can communicate these factors both within in and outside of organizations, and 3) corporations can rapidly influence the previous elements. Authors emphasize that it is necessary for businesses to prioritize the hard factors before they can move forward and improve.

This YouTube video recounts the true story of Lewis Blackman, a 15-year-old boy who died in a hospital following routine surgery. This story sheds light on the importance of healthcare providers to not only be cognizant of their patients’ conditions,  but to also frequently engage with families so they feel involved in patient care.

This story has been taken from the Book “Wall of Silence” authored by Rosemary Gibson and Janardan Prasad Singh. The story can be found in Part One “Breaking the Silence”-“The Human Face of Medical Mistakes” page no-31.

This article discusses the importance of implementing a holistic approach to address both processes and culture in providing safe and exceptional care to patients. This article also includes a road map for healthcare providers, so they can efficiently assess the strengths and weakness of their current care system, so they can organized and intentional in their work, allowing them to improve overall patient care and safety in any clinical setting.

This article focuses on the negative impacts adverse events have on healthcare professionals. Specifically, they feel a sense of inadequacy, shame, and personal grief. As a result, healthcare professionals are dubbed “second victims” of these incidents. The article also delves into obstacles that prevent healthcare professionals from seeking assistance. These obstacles include not wanting to be perceived as vulnerable or weak in front of their coworkers. To assist second victims and their recovery and combat the stigma associated with seeking help, health institutions are encouraged to develop holistic support systems.

The Joint Commission published three reports that address patient care and reducing risks of adverse health outcomes: the Patient Safety Systems , Sentinel Event Policy, and RCA2. The Patient Safety Systems report explains how healthcare professionals can develop effective measures to promote patient safety and compassion towards coworkers. The Sentinel Event Policy report details how the Joint Commission collaborates with healthcare institutions to promote patient safety and improve systems that reduce the risk of adverse incidents. The RCA2: Improving Root Cause Analyses and Actions to Prevent Harm report illustrates strategies that institutions or individuals can utilize to analyze the hazards and faults in their systems to they can effectively prevent future adverse medical outcomes.

Michelle Mello, the Director of the Program in Law and Public Health at the Harvard School of Public Health, analyzed the effectiveness of communication-and-resolution programs (CRPs) in this article. She found that these models are efficient at addressing healthcare liability issues revolving around adverse medical outcomes. These programs offer a guide for healthcare professionals on how to disclose medical errors to their patients, while also developing ways to prevent future adverse events.