Sara L Ackerman1, Gato Gourley2, Gem Le2, Pamela Williams2, Jinoos Yazdany3, Urmimala Sarkar2. 1. From the Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, School of Nursing. 2. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital. 3. Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to develop standards for tracking patient safety gaps in ambulatory care in safety net health systems. METHODS: Leaders from five California safety net health systems were invited to participate in a modified Delphi process sponsored by the Safety Promotion Action Research and Knowledge Network (SPARKNet) and the California Safety Net Institute in 2016. During each of the three Delphi rounds, the feasibility and validity of 13 proposed patient safety measures were discussed and prioritized. Surveys and transcripts from the meetings were analyzed to understand the decision-making process. RESULTS: The Delphi process included eight panelists. Consensus was reached to adopt 9 of 13 proposed measures. All 9 measures were unanimously considered valid, but concern was expressed about the feasibility of implementing several of the measures. CONCLUSIONS: Although safety net health systems face high barriers to standardized measurement, our study demonstrates that consensus can be reached on acceptable and feasible methods for tracking patient safety gaps in safety net health systems. If accompanied by the active participation key stakeholder groups, including patients, clinicians, staff, data system professionals, and health system leaders, the consensus measures reported here represent one step toward improving ambulatory patient safety in safety net health systems.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to develop standards for tracking patient safety gaps in ambulatory care in safety net health systems. METHODS: Leaders from five California safety net health systems were invited to participate in a modified Delphi process sponsored by the Safety Promotion Action Research and Knowledge Network (SPARKNet) and the California Safety Net Institute in 2016. During each of the three Delphi rounds, the feasibility and validity of 13 proposed patient safety measures were discussed and prioritized. Surveys and transcripts from the meetings were analyzed to understand the decision-making process. RESULTS: The Delphi process included eight panelists. Consensus was reached to adopt 9 of 13 proposed measures. All 9 measures were unanimously considered valid, but concern was expressed about the feasibility of implementing several of the measures. CONCLUSIONS: Although safety net health systems face high barriers to standardized measurement, our study demonstrates that consensus can be reached on acceptable and feasible methods for tracking patient safety gaps in safety net health systems. If accompanied by the active participation key stakeholder groups, including patients, clinicians, staff, data system professionals, and health system leaders, the consensus measures reported here represent one step toward improving ambulatory patient safety in safety net health systems.
Authors: Grace M Lee; Ken Kleinman; Stephen B Soumerai; Alison Tse; David Cole; Scott K Fridkin; Teresa Horan; Richard Platt; Charlene Gay; William Kassler; Donald A Goldmann; John Jernigan; Ashish K Jha Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-10-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Tejal K Gandhi; Allen Kachalia; Eric J Thomas; Ann Louise Puopolo; Catherine Yoon; Troyen A Brennan; David M Studdert Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2006-10-03 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Olavo Fernandes; Sean K Gorman; Richard S Slavik; William M Semchuk; Steve Shalansky; Jean-François Bussières; Douglas Doucette; Heather Bannerman; Jennifer Lo; Simone Shukla; Winnie W Y Chan; Natalie Benninger; Neil J MacKinnon; Chaim M Bell; Jeremy Slobodan; Catherine Lyder; Peter J Zed; Kent Toombs Journal: Ann Pharmacother Date: 2015-03-16 Impact factor: 3.154
Authors: Christopher L Roy; Eric G Poon; Andrew S Karson; Zahra Ladak-Merchant; Robin E Johnson; Saverio M Maviglia; Tejal K Gandhi Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2005-07-19 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: D W Bates; L L Leape; D J Cullen; N Laird; L A Petersen; J M Teich; E Burdick; M Hickey; S Kleefield; B Shea; M Vander Vliet; D L Seger Journal: JAMA Date: 1998-10-21 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Lawrence P Casalino; Daniel Dunham; Marshall H Chin; Rebecca Bielang; Emily O Kistner; Theodore G Karrison; Michael K Ong; Urmimala Sarkar; Margaret A McLaughlin; David O Meltzer Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2009-06-22