In their own words: Safety and quality perspectives from families of hospitalized children with medical complexity

Author:

Mauskar Sangeeta12,Ngo Tiffany1ORCID,Haskell Helen3,Mallick Nandini4,Mercer Alexandra N.1,Baird Jennifer5ORCID,Bardsley Kristin6,Berry Jay G.12,Copp Katherine7,Humphrey Kate12,Kelly Michelle M.8ORCID,Landrigan Christopher P.12910ORCID,Matherson Susan6,McGeachey Amanda11,Pinkham Amy6,Rogers Jayne E.6,Khan Alisa12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Pediatrics, Division of General Pediatrics Boston Children's Hospital Boston Massachusetts USA

2. Department of Pediatrics Harvard Medical School Boston Massachusetts USA

3. Mothers Against Medical Error Columbia South Carolina USA

4. Family Advisory Council Boston Children's Hospital Boston Massachusetts USA

5. Institute for Nursing and Interprofessional Research Children's Hospital Los Angeles Los Angeles California USA

6. Department of Nursing Boston Children's Hospital Boston Massachusetts USA

7. School of Public Health, Division of Epidemiology and Community Health University of Minnesota Minneapolis Minnesota USA

8. Department of Pediatrics University of Wisconsin‐Madison School of Medicine and Public Health Madison Wisconsin USA

9. Departments of Medicine and Neurology, Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders Brigham and Women's Hospital Boston Massachusetts USA

10. Division of Sleep Medicine Harvard Medical School Boston Massachusetts USA

11. Maine Children's Cancer Program The Barbara Bush Children's Hospital at Maine Medical Center, Scarborough Portland Maine USA

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundChildren with medical complexity (CMC) experience adverse events due to multiorgan impairment, frequent hospitalizations, subspecialty care, and dependence on multiple medications/equipment. Their families are well‐versed in care and can help identify safety/quality gaps to inform improvements. Although previous studies have shown families identify important safety/quality gaps in hospitals, studies of inpatient safety/quality experience of CMC and their families are limited. To address this gap and identify otherwise unrecognized, family‐prioritized areas for improving safety/quality of CMC, we conducted a secondary qualitative analysis of safety reporting surveys among families of CMC.ObjectiveExplore safety reports from families of hospitalized CMC to identify areas to improve safety/quality.Designs, Settings and ParticipantsWe analyzed free‐text responses from predischarge safety reporting surveys administered to families of CMC at a quaternary children's hospital from April 2018 to November 2020. Using a qualitative descriptive approach, we categorized responses into standard clinical categories. Three team members inductively generated an initial codebook to apply iteratively to responses. Reviewers coded responses collaboratively, resolved discrepancies through consensus, and generated themes.Main Outcome and MeasuresOutcomes: family‐reported areas of safety/quality improvement. Measures: pre‐discharge family surveys.ResultsTwo hundred and eight/two hundred and thirty‐seven (88%) families completed surveys; 83 families offered 138 free‐text safety responses about medications, feeds, cares, and other categories. Themes included unmet expectations of hospital care/environment, lack of consistency, provider–patient communication lapses, families' expertise about care, and the value of transparency.ConclusionTo improve care of CMC and their families, hospitals can manage expectations about hospital limitations, improve consistency of care/communication, acknowledge family expertise, and recognize that family‐observed quality concerns can have safety implications. Soliciting family input can help hospitals improve care in meaningful, otherwise unrecognized ways.

Funder

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Assessment and Diagnosis,Care Planning,Health Policy,Fundamentals and skills,General Medicine,Leadership and Management

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3