Tools for measuring patient safety in primary care settings using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method

Brian Bell, Rachel Spencer, Anthony Avery, Stephen Campbell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)
1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: The majority of patient contacts occur in general practice but general practice patient safety has been poorly described and under-researched to date compared to hospital settings. Our objective was to produce a set of patient safety tools and indicators that can be used in general practices in any healthcare setting and develop a ‘toolkit’ of feasible patient safety measures for general practices in England. Methods: A RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method exercise was conducted with a panel of international experts in general practice patient safety. Statements were developed from an extensive systematic literature review of patient safety in general practice. We used standard RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method rating methods to identify necessary items for assessing patient safety in general practice, framed in terms of the Structure-Process-Outcome taxonomy. Items were included in the toolkit if they received an overall panel median score of ≥7 with agreement (no more than two panel members rating the statement outside a 3-point distribution around the median). Results: Of 205 identified statements, the panel rated 101 as necessary for assessing the safety of general practices. Of these 101 statements, 73 covered structures or organisational issues, 22 addressed processes and 6 focused on outcomes. Conclusions: We developed and tested tools that can lead to interventions to improve safety outcomes in general practice. This paper reports the first attempt to systematically develop a patient safety toolkit for general practice, which has the potential to improve safety, cost effectiveness and patient experience, in any healthcare system.
Original languageEnglish
Article number110
Pages (from-to)1-7
Number of pages7
JournalBMC Family Practice
Volume15
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Patient Safety
General Practice
Primary Health Care
Safety
Delivery of Health Care
England
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Exercise

Cite this

Bell, Brian ; Spencer, Rachel ; Avery, Anthony ; Campbell, Stephen. / Tools for measuring patient safety in primary care settings using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. In: BMC Family Practice. 2014 ; Vol. 15, No. 1. pp. 1-7.
@article{aa42fcb7a7e040068099fd2e583b08f7,
title = "Tools for measuring patient safety in primary care settings using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method",
abstract = "Background: The majority of patient contacts occur in general practice but general practice patient safety has been poorly described and under-researched to date compared to hospital settings. Our objective was to produce a set of patient safety tools and indicators that can be used in general practices in any healthcare setting and develop a ‘toolkit’ of feasible patient safety measures for general practices in England. Methods: A RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method exercise was conducted with a panel of international experts in general practice patient safety. Statements were developed from an extensive systematic literature review of patient safety in general practice. We used standard RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method rating methods to identify necessary items for assessing patient safety in general practice, framed in terms of the Structure-Process-Outcome taxonomy. Items were included in the toolkit if they received an overall panel median score of ≥7 with agreement (no more than two panel members rating the statement outside a 3-point distribution around the median). Results: Of 205 identified statements, the panel rated 101 as necessary for assessing the safety of general practices. Of these 101 statements, 73 covered structures or organisational issues, 22 addressed processes and 6 focused on outcomes. Conclusions: We developed and tested tools that can lead to interventions to improve safety outcomes in general practice. This paper reports the first attempt to systematically develop a patient safety toolkit for general practice, which has the potential to improve safety, cost effectiveness and patient experience, in any healthcare system.",
keywords = "Consensus, Patient safety, Primary health care, Quality indicators, Humans, Patient Safety, Quality Indicators, Health Care, England, Safety Management, Primary Health Care/standards",
author = "Brian Bell and Rachel Spencer and Anthony Avery and Stephen Campbell",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1186/1471-2296-15-110",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "1--7",
journal = "BMC Family Practice",
issn = "1471-2296",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

Tools for measuring patient safety in primary care settings using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. / Bell, Brian; Spencer, Rachel; Avery, Anthony; Campbell, Stephen.

In: BMC Family Practice, Vol. 15, No. 1, 110, 2014, p. 1-7.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Tools for measuring patient safety in primary care settings using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method

AU - Bell, Brian

AU - Spencer, Rachel

AU - Avery, Anthony

AU - Campbell, Stephen

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Background: The majority of patient contacts occur in general practice but general practice patient safety has been poorly described and under-researched to date compared to hospital settings. Our objective was to produce a set of patient safety tools and indicators that can be used in general practices in any healthcare setting and develop a ‘toolkit’ of feasible patient safety measures for general practices in England. Methods: A RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method exercise was conducted with a panel of international experts in general practice patient safety. Statements were developed from an extensive systematic literature review of patient safety in general practice. We used standard RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method rating methods to identify necessary items for assessing patient safety in general practice, framed in terms of the Structure-Process-Outcome taxonomy. Items were included in the toolkit if they received an overall panel median score of ≥7 with agreement (no more than two panel members rating the statement outside a 3-point distribution around the median). Results: Of 205 identified statements, the panel rated 101 as necessary for assessing the safety of general practices. Of these 101 statements, 73 covered structures or organisational issues, 22 addressed processes and 6 focused on outcomes. Conclusions: We developed and tested tools that can lead to interventions to improve safety outcomes in general practice. This paper reports the first attempt to systematically develop a patient safety toolkit for general practice, which has the potential to improve safety, cost effectiveness and patient experience, in any healthcare system.

AB - Background: The majority of patient contacts occur in general practice but general practice patient safety has been poorly described and under-researched to date compared to hospital settings. Our objective was to produce a set of patient safety tools and indicators that can be used in general practices in any healthcare setting and develop a ‘toolkit’ of feasible patient safety measures for general practices in England. Methods: A RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method exercise was conducted with a panel of international experts in general practice patient safety. Statements were developed from an extensive systematic literature review of patient safety in general practice. We used standard RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method rating methods to identify necessary items for assessing patient safety in general practice, framed in terms of the Structure-Process-Outcome taxonomy. Items were included in the toolkit if they received an overall panel median score of ≥7 with agreement (no more than two panel members rating the statement outside a 3-point distribution around the median). Results: Of 205 identified statements, the panel rated 101 as necessary for assessing the safety of general practices. Of these 101 statements, 73 covered structures or organisational issues, 22 addressed processes and 6 focused on outcomes. Conclusions: We developed and tested tools that can lead to interventions to improve safety outcomes in general practice. This paper reports the first attempt to systematically develop a patient safety toolkit for general practice, which has the potential to improve safety, cost effectiveness and patient experience, in any healthcare system.

KW - Consensus

KW - Patient safety

KW - Primary health care

KW - Quality indicators

KW - Humans

KW - Patient Safety

KW - Quality Indicators, Health Care

KW - England

KW - Safety Management

KW - Primary Health Care/standards

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84902795273&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/tools-measuring-patient-safety-primary-care-settings-using-randucla-appropriateness-method-1

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/tools-measuring-patient-safety-primary-care-settings-using-randucla-appropriateness-method

U2 - 10.1186/1471-2296-15-110

DO - 10.1186/1471-2296-15-110

M3 - Article

VL - 15

SP - 1

EP - 7

JO - BMC Family Practice

JF - BMC Family Practice

SN - 1471-2296

IS - 1

M1 - 110

ER -