Our News

Abstract: Never Events are patient safety incidents that can cause harm or death and are so named because policy makers argue there is enough evidence available about how to prevent them, so they should never occur. Never events include wrong site surgery, wrong route drug administration, retained foreign objects and wrong implants. Between April-November 2017 332 Never Events occurred in hospitals in England, indicating that solutions to prevent them are not working. Although Resilient Healthcare is often described as a paradigm shift in safety management it is not clear how it can contribute to the investigation of adverse incidents. Root Cause Analysis (RCA) is currently used for the investigation of Never Events, but recent studies have found the recommendations to be of low quality. There is little incentive, time or resources for healthcare organisations to consider other approaches and little work has been done on how to use Resilient Healthcare insights to augment Safety I practices such as Root Cause Analysis. In this presentation the results of an analysis of 39 Never Events that occurred at one hospital over a two-year period will be discussed. The focus will be on the new insights and perspectives that Resilient Healthcare can offer to improve learning from Never Events. Recommendations for strengthening RCA and learning from Never Events will be discussed.

Biography: Janet Anderson is Director of the Centre for Applied Resilience in Healthcare and a Reader of Healthcare Improvement at King’s College London. She is a human factors psychologist. Her research draws on psychological and organisational theories and knowledge and is focused on designing systems to support safe human activity. She has specialist expertise in the theory and practice of organisational resilience, system modelling using cognitive work analysis, incident reporting and adverse event analysis, and inter professional teamwork. Board level processes and hospital wide systems for improving quality are an area of current research.

Presentation slides available here

Abstract: Inquiries, academic work and expert group reports on problems in the quality of care in the NHS and other healthcare systems have identified shortcomings in ‘openness’—that is, the extent to which organisations enable concerns to be raised and disclosed freely without fear—as critical to the incubation of failings in quality and safety. In response, the NHS in England has developed policy initiatives that seek to improve openness, including a statutory duty of candour when care processes give rise to harm, the introduction of ‘Freedom to Speak Up Guardians’ to facilitate staff voice about concerns, and changes to various processes, including the way serious incidents are investigated. The evidence base for many of these changes, however, is uncertain, and their impact on the quality of care unevaluated.

This paper discusses emergent findings from an ongoing evaluation of various openness initiatives in the NHS, focusing in particular on an interview-based sub-study of senior stakeholder views on the implementation and impact of these initiatives. It highlights some of the challenges involved in achieving greater openness given past experiences and deep-rooted beliefs about the (at best ambivalent, and often negative) consequences of being open, the difficulties involved in diagnosing opacity and fostering openness, and the approaches taken by senior clinicians and managers to translating policy into practice. It relates findings to current policy and wider evidence and theory on interventions to facilitate employee voice and achieve culture change.

Biography: Graham Martin is Director of Research for THIS Institute, a new unit funded by the Health Foundation at the University of Cambridge to develop the evidence base for and impact of work to improve healthcare quality and safety, and Professor of Health Organisation and Policy in the SAPPHIRE Group, University of Leicester. His research focuses on social, organisational and professional issues in healthcare system change, with a particular focus on quality improvement work and policy initiatives to address quality, safety and risk in the NHS.