Avoiding harm through hearing our patients

Bryony Dean Franklin,Rosie Bartel,Peter Howitt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q532

2024-03-06

BMJ

Abstract:Wider lessons from report on redress for people harmed by valproate and pelvic mesh

medicine, general & internal

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Escaping iatrogenic harm: A journey into mental health service avoidance

Wren Aves

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.13020

2024-01-19

Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing

Abstract:Accessible Summary What is known on the subject? Little is known about how mental health services can cause harm in ways other than medication, talking therapies, diagnosis and detention under the Mental Health Act. The outcomes of people who avoid seeking help from mental health services due to previous experiences of harm are not well known. What this article adds to existing knowledge? I provide a first‐person perspective of experiences of harm within mental health services, how this impacted my care, the long‐term effects of the harm on my well‐being and my ongoing experiences of avoiding mental health services. What are the implications for mental health nursing? Healthcare professionals should be aware of the multitude of ways service provision can harm patients, and how, unknown to professionals, patients may create an internal understanding of how to best navigate harmful service environments. Healthcare professionals should have a deeper understanding of the reasons why people may choose not to engage with mental health services, and what impact this may have on them. The recent announcement of the first ever statutory public inquiry into a UK mental health service indicates a growing recognition of iatrogenic harm in mental healthcare. Despite the potential for harm across all services and practices, restrictive practices, psychotherapy, diagnosis and psychiatric medications are often the only areas of mental healthcare given significant attention. While the topic is widely discussed in survivor communities, accounts of harm caused by the everyday workings of services, including team cultures, administrative processes and staff–patient interactions, are missing from academic literature. In this article, I describe my 10‐year journey through mental health services, and how everyday practices, cultures and staff behaviour deeply impacted my ability to receive appropriate care, replicated previously traumatic environments, and damaged my mental health. Taking steps to protect myself from further harm, I self‐discharged and am currently living as a 'service‐avoider'. The ongoing implications of this decision and the long‐term impacts of harm are discussed.

nursing,psychiatry
Public perspective on potential treatment intervention harm in clinical trials-terminology and communication

Rachel Phillips,Dongquan Bi,Beatriz Goulão,Marie Miller,Malak El-Askary,Oluyemi Fagbemi,Curie Freeborn,Maria Giammetta,Noura El Masri,Peter Flockhart,Manos Kumar,Mike Melvin,Dianne Murray,Anthony Myhill,Laila Saeid,Shanice Thomas,Graeme MacLennan,Victoria Cornelius

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-024-08418-w

IF: 2.728

2024-08-31

Trials

Abstract:Background: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are typically designed to determine beneficial intervention effects. In addition, an important aspect of every trial is to collect data on any potential harmful effects, with the aim of ensuring that the benefit-risk balance is appropriate. The language used by trialists to describe these potential harmful effects is inconsistent. In pharmacological trials, researchers collect adverse events; when a causal relationship is suspected adverse events are further classified as adverse reactions. Academic researchers have moved to collectively refer to these as harm outcomes; the pharmaceutical industry refer to these events as safety outcomes. In trials of complex interventions, phrases such as unintended consequences or effects are used. With the inconsistent use of terminology by researchers and the potential benefits to be gained from harmonising communications, we sought public opinion on terminology used to describe harmful effects and how these outcomes are communicated in the scientific literature, as well as in public facing material on medications. Methods: We held two in-person public involvement meetings with public partners, in London and Aberdeen in 2023. Both meetings followed a pre-specified format. We provided a background to the topic including the information researchers collect on potential harms in clinical trials and shared examples on how this information gets presented in practice. We then discussed public partners' perspectives on terminology used and communication of intervention harm in academic journals and in public facing materials. A summary of these discussions and the main topics raised by public partners are presented. Results: Public partners endorsed the use of different terms for different situations, preferring the use of 'side-effect' across all contexts and reserving the use of 'harm' to indicate more severe events. Generally, public partners were happy with the type of information presented in public facing materials but discussions revealed that presentation of information on public NHS websites led to misconceptions about harm. Conclusion: This work provides a starting point on preferred terminology by patients and the public to describe potential harmful intervention effects. Whilst researchers have tried to seek agreement, public partners endorsed use of different terms for different situations. We highlight some key areas for improvement in public facing materials that are necessary to avoid miscommunication and incorrect perception of harm.
Transvaginal mesh in Australia: An analysis of news media reporting from 1996 to 2021

Mina Motamedi,Stacy M Carter,Chris Degeling

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13734

Abstract:Introduction: Transvaginal mesh (mesh) surgeries have been used to treat stress urinary incontinence (incontinence) and/or pelvic organ prolapse (prolapse). In Australia, as in many other countries, the harms caused by mesh eventually prompted individual and collective attempts to achieve redress. The rise of mesh surgery as a procedure, the experience of mesh-affected women and the formal inquiries and legal actions that followed all occurred in social, cultural and discursive contexts. One strategy to understand these contexts is to track how the mesh and key actors in the mesh stories have been portrayed in mass media sources. We conducted a media analysis of the most highly read Australian newspapers and online news media platforms, focusing on how mesh and the interaction of stakeholders in mesh stories were presented to the Australian public. Method: We searched systematically in the top 10 most-read print and online media outlets in Australia. We included all articles that mentioned mesh, from the date of first use of mesh in Australia to the date of our final search (1996-2021). Result: After early scant media reporting focusing on the benefits of mesh procedures, major Australian medicolegal processes created a hook to shift reporting about mesh. The news media then played a significant role in redressing women's experienced epistemic injustice, including by amplifying previously ignored evidence of harm. This created an opportunity for previously unreported suffering to be revealed to powerful actors, in settings beyond the immediate control and epistemic authority of healthcare stakeholders, validating women's testimony and creating new hermeneutic resources for understanding mesh. Over time, media reports show healthcare stakeholders responding sympathetically to these new understandings in public discourse, contrasting with their statements in earlier media coverage. Conclusion: We argue that mass media reporting, in synergy with medicolegal actions and the Australian Senate Inquiry, appears to have provided women with greater epistemic justice, giving their testimony privileged epistemic status such that it was considered by powerful actors. Although medical reporting is not recognised in the hierarchy of evidence embedded in the medical knowledge system, in this case, media reporting appears to have contributed to shaping medical knowledge in significant ways. Patient or public contribution: We used publicly available data, print and online media outlets, for our analysis. Therefore, this manuscript does not contain the direct contribution of patients, service users, caregivers, people with lived experience or members of the public.
Quality improvement project - Reducing the inadvertent prescribing of unopposed estrogen in primary care Dr Liz Horrocks Banstead PCN

Liz Horrocks,Debra Holloway,Janice Rymer,Deborah Bruce

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20533691241240552

Abstract:Objective: The aim of the project was to reduce the risk of patients using the estrogen only part of their hormone replacement therapy (HRT) inadvertently in Banstead PCN. Although understanding about the risk of unopposed estrogen is well understood by prescribers, there are numerous flash points where this exposure can occur which was highlighted by several cases encountered during a study period of 3 months. Study design: Cases encountered revealed numerous reasons for this exposure which were split into three areas: Prescribing factors, dispensing checks and patient understanding. Main outcome measures: Quality improvement suggestions were tailored to the factors involved. IT system changes to EMIS, our main computer software provider, were proposed to enable safer prescribing. Following discussion with key stakeholders, increased education for pharmacists was proposed alongside an alert sticker system at the dispensing end point. Patient understanding and education for all parties was delivered through various routes. Results: The IT system alterations required are complex and still awaited. Funding was obtained and stickers distributed. The results from a re-audit from this intervention are awaited. Interim education measures at an individual level were meantime explored and the impact of them assessed. Patient education and the role of social media were explored. I produced a short video which was circulated to doctors with the plan to distribute via other clinician social media accounts. Conclusions: A key discovery through this study is that many of the flash points identified can be difficult to detect and many are not measurable. The increasing number of HRT prescriptions, time pressures in primary care and the known risk from using unopposed estrogen of endometrial cancer means these changes are of potential great value.
How current law and policy supports providers of NHS healthcare in England to respond to patient harm: A scoping review protocol

Naomi Assame,Susan Greenhalgh,John Tingle,Julie Wright,Gillian Yeowell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0299121

IF: 3.7

2024-03-11

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Introduction Harm arising from National Health Service (NHS) healthcare results in significant human cost for the patient, those who care for them, and the medical staff involved. Furthermore, patient harm results in substantial financial costs to the public purse. Improving how NHS providers in England respond to patient harm could reduce the number of claims for clinical negligence brought against NHS. Doing so will ensure those affected receive the justice they deserve and protect the public purse. Law and policy are key to supporting providers of NHS healthcare to respond to patient harm but are not necessarily understood and therefore can be challenging to apply to practice. Research exploring how law and policy supports this understanding is limited. The purpose of this scoping review is to address this knowledge gap and improve understanding by critically evaluating how law and policy supports providers of NHS healthcare in England to respond to patient harm. Methods and analysis The review will use the methodological framework proposed by Arskey and O’Malley, Levac et al and the Joanna Briggs Institute. Search strategies will be developed using selected key words and index terms. MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Westlaw and reference lists of relevant publications will be searched to identify relevant grey literature. Two reviewers will independently assess the extracted data against the eligibility criteria. All studies identified will be charted and the results presented as a narrative synthesis.

multidisciplinary sciences
Taking women's pain seriously: the surgeon who spoke out about vaginal mesh

Rebecca Coombes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q1195

2024-06-07

BMJ

Abstract:Sohier Elneil came into the public eye when she started speaking out about the devastation that implantation of vaginal mesh had caused to many women. For over 25 years, mesh was used to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence in the United Kingdom. Its use is now suspended outside of strict conditions, but it is still in use globally, including in Europe and parts of the United States.Elneil might have angered many professional colleagues with her outspokenness, but she has found vindication in the findings of a national inquiry that led to sweeping changes in women's care. She spoke to The BMJ as she took up her post as the first professor of urogynaecology at University College London (UCL).Speaking out made me a pariahElneil's first case of extracting mesh was in 2005, a job she describes as "horrible." "At the beginning, the women's stories had a terrible effect....

medicine, general & internal
Reproductive health and blurred professional boundaries

W Chavkin,V Breitbart

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/1049-3867(95)00078-X

IF: 3.053

Women s Health Issues

Abstract:We recognize that many of the issues raised are not simple. Our proposal calls for the same thoughtful deliberation applied in other settings to be brought to bear on reproductive health care. Some have already tried alternative approaches. In Albuquerque, New Mexico, a university hospital neonatologist and the district attorney have collaborated to create an alternative to sentencing program for women who are arrested for drug-related crimes and found to be both pregnant and drug addicted. Rather than proceed with criminal sanctions, these women are offered entry into a drug treatment program that is geared to families with young children and run by the pediatrics department. Here, the physician and the district attorney collaboratively responded in ways congruent with the professional integrity of each. In another example in Portland, Oregon, physicians, drug treatment providers, and child protective social service representatives cooperatively defeated a legislative proposal to mandatorily test and report pregnant women for illicit drug use and, instead, formed a task force to jointly develop state policy regarding the issue. Drug use, HIV infection, child abuse, and poverty are all cause for alarm. Yet it is critical that our frustration about these difficult problems not be translated into blaming individuals for "deviance," or into short-term inadequate responses. In developing policy we should consider the impact on the legal and ethical rights and obligations of both patient and physician. For every course, we should evaluate both immediate and long-term efficacy, the consequences for the doctor-patient relationship, and the consequences for medical integrity. In the midst of the present regulatory and fiscal turmoil affecting health care, we urge physicians to be careful and deliberate in the policies they embrace and the actions they take.
Patient and caregiver perspectives on causes and prevention of ambulatory adverse events: multilingual qualitative study

Anjana E Sharma,Amber S Tran,Marika Dy,Adriana L Najmabadi,Kristan Olazo,Beatrice Huang,Urmimala Sarkar,PARTNRS Study Stakeholder Advisory Research Council,Adeola Oni-Orisan,Alexis Blueford,Amelia Johnson,Ana Vilma Aquino,Barbara Glassey,Celia Damaris Mendez,Forrest M Thompson,Isela Mosteiro,Jane Redmond,Judith Burns,Kathleen Noonan,Lydia Leung,Olevia Cox,Patrick McKenna,Robin Cotterhill,Roxie Blue Harris,Sandeep Bhullar,Sharon Kincaid,Shin-YuLee PharmD

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016955

2024-07-11

Abstract:Context: Ambulatory adverse events (AEs) affect up to 25% of the global population and cause over 7 million preventable hospital admissions around the world. Though patients and caregivers are key actors in promoting and monitoring their own ambulatory safety, healthcare teams do not traditionally partner with patients in safety efforts. We sought to identify what patients and caregivers contribute when engaged in ambulatory AE review, focusing on under-resourced care settings. Methods: We recruited adult patients, caregivers and patient advisors who spoke English, Spanish and/or Cantonese, from primary care clinics affiliated with a public health network in the USA. All had experience taking or managing a high-risk medication (blood thinners, insulin or opioid). We presented two exemplar ambulatory AEs: one involving a warfarin drug-drug interaction, and one involving delayed diagnosis of colon cancer. We conducted semistructured focus groups and interviews to elicit participants' perceptions of causal factors and potential preventative measures for similar AEs. The study team conducted a mixed inductive-deductive qualitative analysis to derive major themes. Findings: The sample included 6 English-speaking patients (2 in the focus group, 4 individual interviews), 6 Spanish-speaking patients (individual interviews), 4 Cantonese-speaking patients (2 in the focus group, 2 interviews), and 6 English-speaking patient advisors (focus group). Themes included: (1) Patients and teams have specific safety responsibilities; (2) Proactive communication drives safe ambulatory care; (3) Barriers related to limited resources contribute to ambulatory AEs. Patients and caregivers offered ideas for operational changes that could drive new safety projects. Conclusions: An ethnically and linguistically diverse group of primary care patients and caregivers defined their agency in ensuring ambulatory safety and offered pragmatic ideas to prevent AEs they did not directly experience. Patients and caregivers in a safety net health system can feasibly participate in AE review to ensure that safety initiatives include their valuable perspectives.
A proposal for using benefit-risk methods to improve the prominence of adverse event results when reporting trials

Nikki Totton,Ed Waddingham,Ruth Owen,Steven Julious,Dyfrig Hughes,Jonathan Cook

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-024-08228-0

IF: 2.728

2024-06-24

Trials

Abstract:Adverse events suffer from poor reporting within randomised controlled trials, despite them being crucial to the evaluation of a treatment. A recent update to the CONSORT harms checklist aims to improve reporting by providing structure and consistency to the information presented. We propose an extension wherein harms would be reported in conjunction with effectiveness outcome(s) rather than in silo to provide a more complete picture of the evidence acquired within a trial. Benefit-risk methods are designed to simultaneously consider both benefits and risks, and therefore, we believe these methods could be implemented to improve the prominence of adverse events when reporting trials. The aim of this article is to use case studies to demonstrate the practical utility of benefit-risk methods to present adverse events results alongside effectiveness results. Two randomised controlled trials have been selected as case studies, the Option-DM trial and the SANAD II trial. Using a previous review, a shortlist of 17 benefit-risk methods which could potentially be used for reporting RCTs was created. From this shortlist, three benefit-risk methods are applied across the two case studies. We selected these methods for their usefulness to achieve the aim of this paper and which are commonly used in the literature. The methods selected were the Benefit-Risk Action Team (BRAT) Framework, net clinical benefit (NCB), and the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) 3 × 3 table. Results using the benefit-risk method added further context and detail to the clinical summaries made from the trials. In the case of the SANAD II trial, the clinicians concluded that despite the primary outcome being improved by the treatment, the increase in adverse events negated the improvement and the treatment was therefore not recommended. The benefit-risk methods applied to this case study outlined the data that this decision was based on in a clear and transparent way. Using benefit-risk methods to report the results of trials can increase the prominence of adverse event results by presenting them alongside the primary efficacy/effectiveness outcomes. This ensures that all the factors which would be used to determine whether a treatment would be recommended are transparent to the reader.

medicine, research & experimental
Colleague Care – Implementing a staff peer support program

Sarah Michael,Lila Petar Vrklevski,Lesley Innes,Andrew Hallahan,Blaise Lyons,Sharon Campbell,Graeme Slade,Bethan Richards

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10398562241301944

2024-11-28

Australasian Psychiatry

Abstract:Australasian Psychiatry, Ahead of Print. ObjectivesIn line with the widespread acknowledgement of the harms which can be caused to healthcare staff through their role in adverse events and unexpected patient outcomes, so is there now acceptance of the role of staff peer support programs to support these 'second victims' in a non-clinical way. Here, we share reproduceable steps that any service might take in creating their own staff peer support program.MethodsWe outline the establishment of a program in a NSW health-service encompassing several hospitals and services, from initiation of the program, customising it to our local needs, engaging the broader health service, launching the program, and the ongoing maintenance required.ResultsDedicated resourcing and strong executive support have been essential to launch and maintain the program. Reaching all staff in a large organisation and building trust in the program's confidentiality have been the main challenges.ConclusionsStaff peer support programs, whilst early in their evidence, offer a way to provide practical, non-clinical support to staff harmed through adverse events in healthcare. Here, we offer methodology and learnings for all services to consider when implementing a localised program.

psychiatry
Adverse mental health inpatient experiences: Qualitative systematic review of international literature

Nutmeg Hallett,Rachel Dickinson,Emachi Eneje,Geoffrey L. Dickens

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2024.104923

IF: 8.1

2024-10-05

International Journal of Nursing Studies

Abstract:Background Trauma is increasingly linked to poor health outcomes. Adverse experiences in mental health inpatient settings can be traumatic and contribute to long-lasting negative effects like post-traumatic stress disorder. However, the full range of relevant experiences is often unaddressed in-service design and delivery. Objective To describe the spectrum of negative experiences that people identify while they are inpatients in adult mental health services. Design Systematic literature review. Setting(s) Inpatient mental health settings. Participants 111 studies from 25 countries. Methods CINAHL, MEDLINE and PsycINFO were searched from 2000 onwards, alongside a search of Google Scholar. The quality of studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative checklist. Data were synthesised using the 'best-fit' framework synthesis approach. A patient and public involvement reference group contributed to the review. Results Adverse mental health inpatient experiences can be conceptualised under three headings: the ecosystem (the physical environment and the resources available, and other people within or influential to that environment); systems (processes and transitions); and the individual (encroachments on autonomy and traumatisation). Conclusions Improved patient experience is associated with improved patient outcomes, and addressing negative experiences could significantly impact patient care. Mental health professionals should strive to create inpatient environments that are supportive, respectful and safe for patients, which consideration of the adversity framework developed from this review can facilitate. Registration The review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42022323237). Tweetable abstract Review suggests traumatic experiences in mental health inpatient settings can worsen outcomes. Urges redesign of environment, processes and autonomy to improve care @dr_nutmeg @EmxEn @RAVresearchUoB @IMH_UoB

nursing
A SAFER Workplace: Broadening Peer Support Programs

Julia H. Vermylen,Inger Burnett-Zeigler,Gaurava Agarwal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3928/00485713-20231122-01

2024-01-01

Psychiatric Annals

Abstract:Mistreatment from patients and their visitors is a troubling problem affecting the majority of physicians throughout their career and disproportionately impacting female and nonwhite physicians. This article reviews the prevalence and impact of mistreatment of physicians from patients and their visitors and reviews steps that organizations can take to address mistreatment from patients. Additionally, this article highlights a unique opportunity to expand peer support programs to provide trauma-informed emotional first aid to physicians after episodes of mistreatment and provides a communication roadmap, SAFER, to guide peer supporters. [ Psychiatr Ann . 2024;54(1):e3–e8.]

psychiatry
Pain and other complications of pelvic mesh: a systematic review of qualitative studies and thematic synthesis of womens accounts

Amanda C de C Williams,Mary Lodato,Honor McGrigor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085879

IF: 3.006

2024-06-04

BMJ Open

Abstract:Objectives Synthesis of the experience of women with pain from pelvic or vaginal mesh or its removal, to identify pain-related problems and to formulate psychological aspects of pain. Design Systematic review and thematic analysis of qualitative studies of pain from pelvic or vaginal mesh, or mesh removal, in women over 18 years, using individual interviews, focus groups, free text, or written or oral contributions to formal enquiries. Data sources Medline, Embase and PsycINFO, from inception to 26 April 2023. Eligibility criteria Qualitative studies of pain and other symptoms from pelvic or vaginal mesh or its removal; adults; no language restriction. Data extraction and synthesis Line-by-line coding of participant quotations and study author statements by one author to provide codes that were applied to half the studies by another author and differences resolved by discussion. Codes were grouped into subthemes and themes by both authors, then scrutinised and discussed by a focus group of mesh-injured women for omissions, emphasis and coherence. Studies were appraised using an amalgamation of the CASP and COREQ tools. Results 2292 search results produced 9 eligible studies, with 7–752 participants, a total of around 2000. Four recruited patients, four totally or partially from mesh advocacy groups, and two were national enquiries (UK and Australia). Four major themes were as follows: broken body, broken mind; distrust of doctors and the medical industry; broken life and keeping going—a changed future. Psychological content mainly concerned the loss of trust in medical care, leaving women unsupported in facing an uncertain future. Mesh-injured women strongly endorsed the findings. Conclusions Pain and other problems associated with pelvic mesh are profound and far-reaching for women affected. Worse, they feel subject to continued gaslighting, including denial of their mesh-related problems and dismissal of their concerns about continued mesh insertion. PROSPERO registration number CRD42022330527.

medicine, general & internal
Do no harm: Balancing the costs and benefits of patient outcomes in health psychology research and practice

Jane Ogden

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105316648760

2016-05-31

Journal of Health Psychology

Abstract:This article analyses research exploring medication adherence, help-seeking behaviour, screening and behaviour change to argue that all interventions have the potential for both benefit and harm. Accordingly, health psychology may have inadvertently contributed to psychological harms (e.g. lead times, anxiety, risk compensation and rebound effects); medical harms (e.g. medication side effects, unnecessary procedures) and social harms (e.g. financial costs, increased consultations rates). Such harms may result from medicalisation or pharmaceuticalisation. Or, they may reflect the ways in which we manage probabilities and an optimistic bias that emphasises benefit over cost.

psychology, clinical
Tackling health inequalities together: inclusion health and co-production

Helen McGeown,Lucy Potter,Danny Sherwood,Bridging Gaps group,Jeremy Horwood,Cait Taylor,Michelle Farr

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp24x739365

2024-09-27

British Journal of General Practice

Abstract:Trauma-informed approaches acknowledge the impact of trauma on the health of patients and staff, and the ways in which health care is accessed and experienced.1 There is growing interest in these approaches in both a UK and international primary care context.2 Intrinsic to a trauma-informed approach (although rarely achieved in practice)2 is the co-production of health services with those with relevant lived experience. Existing models of patient involvement in primary care tend to rely significantly on feedback forms or surveys, which do not facilitate an ongoing dialogue between patients and healthcare providers. Patient participation groups (PPGs) can provide a more meaningful space in which services can be truly co-produced, in particular where careful attention is given to power dynamics in the room.3 There is, however, an increasing understanding of the need for flexibility in our approaches to patient involvement, which should incorporate multiple models, recognising individuals' diverse experiences, preferences, and capacity for participation.3 The Care Quality Commission (CQC) suggests that we may have '... more effective conversations through engaging with different community groups at different times and in different places' .4 The need for provision of protected spaces with careful attention to sociocultural backgrounds and power dynamics is echoed within the principles of trauma-informed care.1 The current authors have worked proactively with specific community groups who are often poorly served by our health services. We have sought to create protected spaces and mitigate existing power dynamics to support the free communication of ideas, working together with partnership organisations to improve local primary care provision. One25 is a third-sector organisation in Bristol that supports women with severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD — including combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, street-based sex work, violence and abuse, and poor mental health). These women have all encountered significant ...

medicine, general & internal,primary health care
CONSORT Harms 2022 statement, explanation, and elaboration: updated guideline for the reporting of harms in randomised trials

Daniela R Junqueira,Liliane Zorzela,Susan Golder,Yoon Loke,Joel J Gagnier,Steven A Julious,Ba Pham,Rachel Phillips,Pasqualina Santaguida,Roberta W Scherer,David Moher,John P A Ioannidis,Sunita Vohra,Tianȷing Li,Evan Mayo–Wilson,Peter C Gotzsche

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2022-073725

2023-04-25

The BMJ

Abstract:Randomised controlled trials are the reference standard among study designs to investigate the benefits of interventions. These trials are the foundation for regulatory approval of drugs and are also important when evaluating surgical procedures, medical devices, psychological and behavioural interventions, social interventions, and complementary therapies. Ideally, randomised controlled trials should evaluate not only potential benefits of interventions, but also potential harms. However, these trials are often limited in their ability to evaluate harms because of the short duration of intervention and follow-up, restricted study populations (eg, excluding participants with comorbidities or receiving cointerventions), and lack of statistical power to assess rare events.1234 Nevertheless, prospectively collected data about harms in randomised controlled trials are important to inform knowledge synthesis and patient and provider decisions. The randomised design offers a clear advantage and a unique opportunity to study harms in a controlled setting. Despite these strengths, trials often fail to report harms,56...

medicine, general & internal
The patient voice: valproate, topiramate and MHRA regulation

Jane Hanna,Faye Waddams,Sarah L Jones,Rachel Arkell,Heather Angus-Leppan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.06.24313040

2024-09-06

Abstract:Valproate and topiramate use are increasingly restricted by government regulations, such as those of the MHRA. The views of people with epilepsy and their families affected by these have been little studied. This qualitative study examines 19 people with epilepsy and their views on the restrictions, and examines the thematic outcomes of these views, in terms of direct damage of avoiding valproate or topiramate (including SUDEP), missed opportunities and disruption of belief systems. Recommendations to align the regulations to human rights and true informed decision making are made.
Lessons learnt from a 2017 Irish national clinical claims review: a retrospective observational study

Karen A Power,Irene O'Byrne Maguire,Noelle Byrne,Deirdre Walsh,Karen Robinson,Mark McCullagh,Yvonne Fallon,Mary Godfrey,Ann Duffy,Claire O'Regan,Mairead Twohig,Cathal O'Keeffe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002688

2024-09-03

Abstract:Objective: Learning from adverse outcomes in health and social care is critical to advancing a culture of patient safety and reducing the likelihood of future preventable harm to service users. This review aims to present an overview of all clinical claims finalised in one calendar year involving publicly funded health and social care providers in Ireland. Design: This is a retrospective observational study. The Clinical Risk Unit (CRU) of the State Claims Agency identified all service-user clinical claims finalised between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2017 from Ireland's National Incident Management System (n=713). Claims that had incurred financial damages were considered for further analysis (n=356). 202 claims underwent an in-depth qualitative review. Of these, 57 related to maternity and gynaecology, 64 to surgery, 46 to medicine, 20 to community health and social care and 15 related to children's healthcare. Results: The services of surgery and medicine ranked first and second, respectively, in terms of a number of claims. Claims in maternity services, despite ranking third in terms of claims numbers, resulted in the highest claims costs. Catastrophic injuries in babies resulting in cerebral palsy or other brain injury accounted for the majority of this cost.Diagnostic errors and inadequate or substandard communication, either with service users and/or interprofessional communication with colleagues, emerged as common issues across all clinical areas analysed. Quantitative analysis of contributory factors demonstrated that the complexity and seriousness of the service user's condition was a significant contributory factor in the occurrence of incidents leading to claims. Conclusion: This national report identifies common issues resulting in claims. Targeting these issues could mitigate patient safety risks and reduce the cost of claims.
Patients' perspectives on quality and patient safety failures: lessons learned from an inquiry into transvaginal mesh in Australia

Mina Motamedi,Chris Degeling,Stacy M. Carter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10791-w

2024-04-11

BMC Health Services Research

Abstract:Transvaginal mesh (TVM) surgeries emerged as an innovative treatment for stress urine incontinency and/or pelvic organ prolapse in 1996. Years after rapid adoption of these surgeries into practice, they are a key example of worldwide failure of healthcare quality and patient safety. The prevalence of TVM-associated harms eventually prompted action globally, including an Australian Commonwealth Government Senate Inquiry in 2017.

health care sciences & services
Routine discussion of previous trauma in the perinatal period: Insights from interviews with women, voluntary sector representatives, and maternity care providers

Joanne Cull,Gill Thomson,Soo Downe,Michelle Fine,Anastasia Topalidou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.10.01.24314700

2024-10-04

Abstract:Background Many pregnant women have a history of trauma, such as abuse or violence, which can significantly impact their mental and physical health. Discussing these experiences in maternity care presents an opportunity to support women, reduce stigma, and connect them with resources. However, concerns persist about stigmatisation, re-traumatisation and unwarranted safeguarding referrals. As part of a larger study that aimed to develop a methodology for conducting trauma discussions, interviews were carried out with a range of stakeholders. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with women with trauma histories (experts by experience; n=4), representatives of voluntary sector organisations (n=7), and healthcare providers (n=12). Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. The study employed a critical participatory action research approach, supported by a Patient and Public Involvement & Engagement group (named as the Research Collective for this study) comprising experts by experience, maternity care professionals, and voluntary sector practitioners. The group contributed to both the design and analysis phases of the research. Findings Five key themes emerged from the interviews, exploring both the benefits and challenges of trauma discussion in maternity care. Participants reflected on who should lead these discussions, the appropriate settings and timings, and strategies for effective communication. The emotional and training needs of care providers conducting trauma discussions were also highlighted. Conclusion Trauma discussions in maternity care are a complex but necessary intervention that require careful consideration of timing, communication, and referral pathways. This paper offers concrete steps towards creating a more empathetic and supportive maternity care environment.

Obstetrics and Gynecology

Avoiding harm through hearing our patients

Escaping iatrogenic harm: A journey into mental health service avoidance

Public perspective on potential treatment intervention harm in clinical trials-terminology and communication

Transvaginal mesh in Australia: An analysis of news media reporting from 1996 to 2021

Quality improvement project - Reducing the inadvertent prescribing of unopposed estrogen in primary care Dr Liz Horrocks Banstead PCN

How current law and policy supports providers of NHS healthcare in England to respond to patient harm: A scoping review protocol

Taking women's pain seriously: the surgeon who spoke out about vaginal mesh

Reproductive health and blurred professional boundaries

Patient and caregiver perspectives on causes and prevention of ambulatory adverse events: multilingual qualitative study

A proposal for using benefit-risk methods to improve the prominence of adverse event results when reporting trials

Colleague Care – Implementing a staff peer support program

Adverse mental health inpatient experiences: Qualitative systematic review of international literature

A SAFER Workplace: Broadening Peer Support Programs

Pain and other complications of pelvic mesh: a systematic review of qualitative studies and thematic synthesis of womens accounts

Do no harm: Balancing the costs and benefits of patient outcomes in health psychology research and practice

Tackling health inequalities together: inclusion health and co-production

CONSORT Harms 2022 statement, explanation, and elaboration: updated guideline for the reporting of harms in randomised trials

The patient voice: valproate, topiramate and MHRA regulation

Lessons learnt from a 2017 Irish national clinical claims review: a retrospective observational study

Patients' perspectives on quality and patient safety failures: lessons learned from an inquiry into transvaginal mesh in Australia

Routine discussion of previous trauma in the perinatal period: Insights from interviews with women, voluntary sector representatives, and maternity care providers