Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, 75 Talavera Rd, North Ryde, Sydney, New South Wales 2109, Australia.
IIMPACT in Health, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, South Australia 5001, Australia.
Int J Qual Health Care. 2023 Oct 26;35(4). doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzad085.
Residents of aged care services can experience safety incidents resulting in preventable serious harm. Accreditation is a commonly used strategy to improve the quality of care; however, narrative information within accreditation reports is not generally analysed as a source of safety information to inform learning. In Australia, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission (ACQSC), the sector regulator, undertakes over 500 accreditation assessments of residential aged care services against eight national standards every year. From these assessments, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission generates detailed Site Audit Reports. In over one-third (37%) of Site Audit Reports, standards relating to Personal and Clinical Care (Standard 3) are not being met. The aim of this study was to identify the types of resident Safety Risks that relate to Personal and Clinical Care Standards not being met during accreditation or re-accreditation. These data could inform priority setting at policy, regulatory, and service levels. An analytical framework was developed based on the World Health Organization's International Classification for Patient Safety and other fields including Clinical Issue (the issue related to the incident impacting the resident, e.g. wound/skin or pain). Information relating to safety incidents in the Site Audit Reports was extracted, and a content analysis undertaken using the analytical framework. Clinical Issue and the International Classification for Patient Safety-based classification were combined to describe a clinically intuitive category ('Safety Risks') to describe ways in which residents could experience unsafe care, e.g. diagnosis/assessment of pain. The resulting data were descriptively analysed. The analysis included 65 Site Audit Reports that were undertaken between September 2020 and March 2021. There were 2267 incidents identified and classified into 274 types of resident Safety Risks. The 12 most frequently occurring Safety Risks account for only 32.3% of all incidents. Relatively frequently occurring Safety Risks were organisation management of infection control; diagnosis/assessment of pain, restraint, resident behaviours, and falls; and multiple stages of wounds/skin management, e.g. diagnosis/assessment, documentation, treatment, and deterioration. The analysis has shown that accreditation reports contain valuable data that may inform prioritization of resident Safety Risks in the Australian residential aged care sector. A large number of low-frequency resident Safety Risks were detected in the accreditation reports. To address these, organizations may use implementation science approaches to facilitate evidence-based strategies to improve the quality of care delivered to residents. Improving the aged care workforces' clinical skills base may address some of the Safety Risks associated with diagnosis/assessment and wound management.
养老服务机构的居民可能会经历安全事件,导致可预防的严重伤害。认证是提高护理质量的常用策略;然而,认证报告中的叙述信息通常不作为安全信息的来源进行分析,以提供学习信息。在澳大利亚,行业监管机构老年护理质量和安全委员会(ACQSC)每年对 8 项国家标准下的 500 多家养老院进行评估。从这些评估中,老年护理质量和安全委员会生成详细的现场审计报告。在超过三分之一(37%)的现场审计报告中,与个人和临床护理相关的标准(标准 3)未得到满足。这项研究的目的是确定与认证或再认证期间个人和临床护理标准未得到满足相关的居民安全风险类型。这些数据可以为政策、监管和服务层面的优先事项设定提供信息。根据世界卫生组织的患者安全国际分类和其他领域(如与影响居民的事件相关的临床问题),制定了一个分析框架。从现场审计报告中提取与安全事件相关的信息,并使用分析框架进行内容分析。将临床问题和基于患者安全国际分类的分类结合起来,描述了一种直观的临床类别(“安全风险”),以描述居民可能经历不安全护理的方式,例如疼痛的诊断/评估。对所得数据进行描述性分析。分析包括 2020 年 9 月至 2021 年 3 月期间进行的 65 份现场审计报告。确定了 2267 起事件,并将其分类为 274 种居民安全风险类型。出现频率最高的 12 种安全风险仅占所有事件的 32.3%。出现频率较高的安全风险包括感染控制的组织管理;疼痛、约束、居民行为和跌倒的诊断/评估;以及多个阶段的伤口/皮肤管理,例如诊断/评估、文件记录、治疗和恶化。分析表明,认证报告包含有价值的数据,可能为澳大利亚养老院居民安全风险的优先级排序提供信息。在认证报告中发现了大量低频率的居民安全风险。为了解决这些问题,组织可能会使用实施科学方法来促进循证策略,以提高向居民提供的护理质量。提高老年护理人员的临床技能基础可能会解决与诊断/评估和伤口管理相关的一些安全风险。