AimsTo investigate perceived factors relating to the reliable application of four clinical care practices targeting ventilator-associated pneumonias, in the context of a patient safety improvement initiative called the Safer Patients Initiative (SPI).MethodsQualitative case study. Seventeen semi-structured individual interviews with clinical operational leads, programme coordinators and executive managers who were involved in the implementation of the programme's critical care work stream during its pilot phase. The interviews had a focus on perceived aspects pertaining to the reliable implementation of the four clinical practices, promoted by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement as the 'ventilator care bundle'.ResultsThematic analysis of the verbatim transcripts revealed three overarching themes experienced by the participants during the implementation of the clinical practices included in the SPI ventilator care bundle: the power of measurement, feedback to peers and experts and improvement tools specific to SPI. Consistent measurement of compliance with the four elements of the bundle and outcomes made the staff realize that their engagement in previous improvement work for ventilated patients was inadequate and motivated them to apply the introduced clinical practices more reliably. Feedback to experts and peers of staff compliance with the four clinical practices and outcome improvement was perceived as a very influential aspect of SPI. Small tests of change (Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles), teaching sessions and daily goal sheets were quoted as particularly useful tools throughout the implementation of the four clinical care practices.ConclusionsFuture initiatives that aim to improve the adherence of clinical staff with clinical practice guidelines in intensive care units could benefit from integrating in their methodology consistent measurement and feedback practices of both process compliance and outcome data.

OBJECTIVES:To identify factors affecting doctors' engagement with the Safer Patients Initiative (SPI).DESIGN:Qualitative interview study.SETTING:Four organisations participating in phase 1 of the SPI programme, from four different geographical locations in the UK.PARTICIPANTS:34 staff members, comprising senior executive/management leads involved in the SPI programme, the principal SPI programme coordinator and the operational leads in each of the SPI clinical work areas.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Staff perceptions of issues affecting medical engagement with SPI, identified in the interviews.RESULTS:Qualitative analysis identified seven factors that were reported to affect medical engagement with the SPI programme: (1) Organisation Track Record in QSI, (2) Resource Availability & Allocation, (3) Perceptions of the purpose of SPI, (4) Evidence of Efficacy of Programme, (5) External Expertise, (6) Local Programme Champions and (7) Managers Involvement. Specific barriers and general enabling strategies were identified and described for each factor, based upon participants' experiences.CONCLUSIONS:Medical engagement is a complex technical, socio-political and motivational issue that is underpinned by a series of inter-related factors associated with the organisational context, the design of improvement programmes and how they are implemented and promoted. Healthcare organisations planning to embark on safety and quality-improvement programmes may benefit from systematically addressing the core themes identified by this study, in order to promote optimal medical engagement.

BACKGROUND:Patient safety has been high on the agenda for more than a decade. Despite many national initiatives aimed at improving patient safety, the challenge remains to find coherent and sustainable organisation-wide safety-improvement programmes. In the UK, the Safer Patients' Initiative (SPI) was established to address this challenge. Important in the success of such an endeavour is understanding 'readiness' at the organisational level, identifying the preconditions for success in this type of programme. This article reports on a case study of the four NHS organisations participating in the first phase of SPI, examining the perceptions of organisational readiness and the relationship of these factors with impact by those actively involved in the initiative.MATERIALS AND METHODS:A mixed-methods design was used, involving a survey and semistructured interviews with senior executive leads, the principal SPI programme coordinator and the four operational leads in each of the SPI clinical work areas in all four organisations taking part in the first phase of SPI.CONCLUSIONS:This preliminary work would suggest that prior to the start of organisation-wide quality- and safety-improvement programmes, organisations would benefit from an assessment of readiness with time spent in the preparation of the organisational infrastructure, processes and culture. Furthermore, a better understanding of the preconditions that mark an organisation as ready for improvement work would allow policymakers to set realistic expectations about the outcomes of safety campaigns.

Rationale, aims and objectives Arguably, a shared perspective between managers and their clinical staff on an improvement initiative would allow for most effective implementation and increase programme success. However, it has been reported that research has failed to differentiate between managers and line employees on quality management implementation and examine their differences in perceptions of quality and safety initiatives. The aim of this study was to compare clinical frontline staff and senior managers' perceptions on the importance of an organization-wide quality and safety collaborative: the Safer Patients Initiative (SPI).

RATIONALE AND AIMS:In several countries, collaborative improvement programmes involving multiple health care organizations have been developed to address the issue of patient safety and reliability of care at an organization-wide level. In the UK, the Health Foundation's Safer Patients Initiative (SPI) was developed to achieve breakthrough improvement in the quality and safety of care in 24 acute hospital Trusts between 2004 and 2008. Research evidence for the effectiveness of programmes of this type and the mechanisms by which positive outcomes are achieved remains limited. We report a multi-method preliminary study based upon phase 1 of SPI to understand participant's perceptions of the local impact of the programme and to form the basis of future research in this area.METHODS:Data were collected on the perceived local impact of SPI on a range of clinical, organizational and social dimensions relating to care quality and safety. Data were collected retrospectively from local SPI programme improvement teams using semi-structured interviews and surveys. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were performed, and the results synthesized under common themes and frameworks.RESULTS:Specific dimensions of care systems commonly considered to be affected by SPI, included culture, strategic priority, organizational capability and clinical care delivery. Survey data revealed the perceived importance for success of a range of programme components: quality improvement methodology, learning sessions and programme faculty support, along with predefined clinical practice changes. Safety climate and capability dimensions rated as most sensitive to the effects of the SPI programme related to multi-professional engagement and communication, the degree of routine monitoring of care processes and the capacity to evaluate the impact of changes to clinical work systems.CONCLUSIONS:Study findings support the view that programmes such as SPI have considerable impact upon the cultural, inter-professional, strategic and organizational aspects of care delivery, in addition to clinical working practices. The specific implications for understanding the effects of complex organization-level interventions and future research design are discussed.

Large-scale national and multi-institutional patient safety improvement programmes are being developed in the health care systems of several countries to address problems in the reliability of care delivered to patients. Drawing upon popular collaborative improvement models, these campaigns are ambitious in their aims to improve patient safety in macro-level systems such as whole health care organisations. This article considers the methodological issues involved in conducting research and evaluation of these programmes. Several specific research challenges are outlined, which result from the complexity of longitudinal, multi-level intervention programmes and the variable, highly sociotechnical care systems, with which they interact. Organisational-level improvement programmes are often underspecified due to local variations in context and organisational readiness for improvement work. The result is variable implementation patterns and local adaptations. Programme effects span levels and other boundaries within a system, vary dynamically or are cumulative over time and are problematic to understand in terms of cause and effect, where concurrent external influences exist and the impact upon study endpoints may be mediated by a range of organisational and social factors. We outline the methodological approach to research in the United Kingdom Safer Patients Initiative, to exemplify how some of the challenges for research in this area can be met through a multi-method, longitudinal research design. Specifically, effective research designs must be sensitive to complex variation, through employing multiple qualitative and quantitative measures, collect data over time to understand change and utilise descriptive techniques to capture specific interactions between programme and context for implementation. When considering the long-term, sustained impact of an improvement programme, researchers must consider how to define and measure the capability for continuous safe and reliable care as a property of the whole care system. This requires a sociotechnical approach, rather than focusing upon one microsystem, disciplinary perspective or single level of the system.

Humans devote much time to the exchange of memories within the context of shared general and personal semantic knowledge. Our hypothesis was that functional imaging in normal subjects would demonstrate the convergence of speech comprehension and production on high-order heteromodal and amodal cortical areas implicated in declarative memory functions. Activity independent of speech phase (that is, comprehension and production) was most evident in the left and right lateral anterior temporal cortex. Significant activity was also observed in the posterior cortex, ventral to the angular gyri. The left and right hippocampus and adjacent inferior temporal cortex were active during speech comprehension, compatible with mnemonic encoding of narrative information, but activity was significantly less during the overt memory retrieval associated with speech production. Therefore, although clinical studies suggest that hippocampal function is necessary for the retrieval as well as the encoding of memories, the former appears to depend on much less net synaptic activity. In contrast, the retrosplenial/posterior cingulate cortex and the parahippocampal area, which are closely associated anatomically with the hippocampus, were equally active during both speech comprehension and production. The results demonstrate why a severe and persistent inability both to understand and produce meaningful speech in the absence of an impairment to process linguistic forms is usually only observed after bilateral, and particularly anterior, destruction of the temporal lobes, and emphasize the importance of retrosplenial/posterior cingulate cortex, an area known to be affected early in the course of Alzheimer9s disease, in the processing of memories during communication.