Dataset Information

Why do healthcare professionals fail to escalate as per the early warning system (EWS) protocol? A qualitative evidence synthesis of the barriers and facilitators of escalation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Early warning systems (EWSs) are used to assist clinical judgment in the detection of acute deterioration to avoid or reduce adverse events including unanticipated cardiopulmonary arrest, admission to the intensive care unit and death. Sometimes healthcare professionals (HCPs) do not trigger the alarm and escalate for help according to the EWS protocol and it is unclear why this is the case. The aim of this qualitative evidence synthesis was to answer the question 'why do HCPs fail to escalate care according to EWS protocols?' The findings will inform the update of the National Clinical Effectiveness Committee (NCEC) National Clinical Guideline No. 1 Irish National Early Warning System (INEWS).

Methods

A systematic search of the published and grey literature was conducted (until February 2018). Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted by two reviewers independently using standardised data extraction forms and quality appraisal tools. A thematic synthesis was conducted by two reviewers of the qualitative studies included and categorised into the barriers and facilitators of escalation. GRADE CERQual was used to assess the certainty of the evidence.

Results

Eighteen studies incorporating a variety of HCPs across seven countries were included. The barriers and facilitators to the escalation of care according to EWS protocols were developed into five overarching themes: Governance, Rapid Response Team (RRT) Response, Professional Boundaries, Clinical Experience, and EWS parameters. Barriers to escalation included: Lack of Standardisation, Resources, Lack of accountability, RRT behaviours, Fear, Hierarchy, Increased Conflict, Over confidence, Lack of confidence, and Patient variability. Facilitators included: Accountability, Standardisation, Resources, RRT behaviours, Expertise, Additional support, License to escalate, Bridge across boundaries, Clinical confidence, empowerment, Clinical judgment, and a tool for detecting deterioration. These are all individual yet inter-related barriers and facilitators to escalation.

Conclusions

The findings of this qualitative evidence synthesis provide insight into the real world experience of HCPs when using EWSs. This in turn has the potential to inform policy-makers and HCPs as well as hospital management about emergency response system-related issues in practice and the changes needed to address barriers and facilitators and improve patient safety and quality of care.

SUBMITTER: O'Neill SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7842002 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Why do healthcare professionals fail to escalate as per the early warning system (EWS) protocol? A qualitative evidence synthesis of the barriers and facilitators of escalation.

O'Neill S M SM Clyne B B Bell M M Casey A A Leen B B Smith S M SM Ryan M M O'Neill M M

BMC emergency medicine 20210128 1

<h4>Background</h4>Early warning systems (EWSs) are used to assist clinical judgment in the detection of acute deterioration to avoid or reduce adverse events including unanticipated cardiopulmonary arrest, admission to the intensive care unit and death. Sometimes healthcare professionals (HCPs) do not trigger the alarm and escalate for help according to the EWS protocol and it is unclear why this is the case. The aim of this qualitative evidence synthesis was to answer the question 'why do HCPs ...[more]

PMID: 33509099

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDisease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are the cornerstone of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment. However, the full benefits of DMARDs are often not realized because many patients are sub-optimally adherent to their medication. In order to optimize adherence, it is essential that healthcare professionals (HCPs) understand patients' barriers and facilitators for medication use. Insight in these barriers and facilitators may foster the dialogue about adequate medication use between HCPs and patients. What HCPs perceive as barriers and facilitators has, so far, scarcely been investigated. This study aimed to identify the perceptions of HCPs on patients' barriers and facilitators that might influence their adherence.MethodsThis qualitative study was performed using semi structured in-depth interviews with HCPs. An interview guide was used, based on an adjusted version of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Thematic analysis was conducted to identify factors that influence barriers and facilitators to DMARD use according to HCPs.ResultsFifteen HCPs (5 rheumatologists, 5 nurses and 5 pharmacists) were interviewed. They mentioned a variety of factors that, according to their perceptions, influence DMARD adherence in patients with RA. Besides therapy-related factors, such as (onset of) medication effectiveness and side-effects, most variation was found within patient-related factors and reflected patients' beliefs, ways of coping, and (self-management) skills toward medication and their condition. In addition, factors related to the condition (e.g., level of disease activity), healthcare team and system (e.g., trust in HCP), and social and economic context (e.g. support, work shifts) were reported.ConclusionsThis study provided insights in HCPs' perceptions of the barriers and facilitators to DMARD use patients with RA. Most factors that were mentioned were patient-related and potentially modifiable. When physicians understand patients' perceptions on medication use, adherence to DMARDs can probably be optimized in patients with RA leading to more effectiveness of treatment outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundDementia has become a major public health issue worldwide due to its rapidly increasing prevalence and an increasing number of dementia-related deaths in long-term care facilities. The aim of this study was to examine health professionals' experiences of potential barriers and facilitators in providing palliative care for people with severe dementia in long-term care facilities.MethodsThis was a qualitative descriptive study. The data were collected from four focus groups and 20 individual in-depth interviews with healthcare professionals from four Norwegian nursing homes. The data were analysed by thematic text analysis, as described by Braun and Clarke.ResultsThe major findings indicate that healthcare professionals experience a lack of continuity as the main barrier to facilitating palliative care. Time pressure and increased efficiency requirements especially affect the weakest and bedridden residents with dementia. The healthcare professionals feel conflicted between wanting to spend more time caring for each individual resident and feeling pressure to help everyone. Although resources are scarce, dying residents are always given priority by healthcare professionals, either by the hiring of extra personnel or the reorganization of tasks in a way that facilitates someone staying with the terminal resident. Advanced care planning was highlighted as a facilitator in providing palliative care, but the extensive use of temporary staff among nurses and doctors and the relocation between the sheltered and long-term wards threaten the continuity in planning and providing palliative care.ConclusionsThe findings indicate that healthcare professionals experienced several structural barriers that prevented the provision of palliative care to people with severe dementia in long-term care facilities. Increasing demands for economic rationality lead to a lack of continuity of care. Organizational changes, such as measures to increase the competence and the proportion of permanent employees and the prevention of burdensome end-of-life transitions, should be implemented to improve continuity and quality of care.

Project description:BackgroundThe number of patients seeking medical care is increasing, necessitating more access to primary healthcare services. As several of these patients usually present with complex medical conditions, the need for interprofessional collaboration (IPC) among health professionals in primary care is necessary. IPC is essential for facing the increasing and challenging healthcare demands. Therefore, the facilitators of and the barriers to IPC should be studied in the hope that the results will be used to promote such endeavors.ObjectivesThis study aimed to explore the perspectives of different health professionals regarding the facilitators of and the barriers to IPC in the primary healthcare settings in Qatar.MethodsA qualitative study using focus groups was conducted within the Primary Health Care Corporation (PHCC) in Qatar. Several health professionals were invited to participate in the focus groups. The focus groups were uniprofessional for general practitioners (GPs), nurses, and dentists, while they were interprofessional for the other health professionals. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim and validated by the research team. The data were analyzed by deductive thematic analysis using the "Gears" Conceptual Model as a coding framework.ResultsFourteen focus groups were conducted involving 58 participants (including 17 GPs, 12 nurses, 15 pharmacists, 3 dentists, and 11 allied health professionals) working in PHCC in Qatar. The findings revealed a spectrum of factors influencing IPC, categorized into four main domains: Macro, Meso, Micro, and individual levels, with each accompanied by relevant barriers and facilitators. Key challenges identified included a lack of communication skills, insufficient professional competencies, and power imbalances, among others. To address these challenges, recommendations were made to implement dedicated training sessions on IPC, reduce hierarchical barriers among different health professionals, and enhance the effectiveness of existing systems. Conversely, it was emphasized that projects and campaigns focused on IPC, alongside the development of enhanced communication skills and the presence of supportive leadership, as essential for facilitating effective IPC in PHCCs.ConclusionThe interplay between the meso, macro, micro, and individual levels highlight the significance of a multifaceted approach to interventions, aiming to enhance the successes of IPC. While initiatives like interprofessional education training are underway, numerous challenges persist before achieving improved collaboration and more efficient integration of IPC in the PHCC setting.

Dataset Information

Why do healthcare professionals fail to escalate as per the early warning system (EWS) protocol? A qualitative evidence synthesis of the barriers and facilitators of escalation.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Why do healthcare professionals fail to escalate as per the early warning system (EWS) protocol? A qualitative evidence synthesis of the barriers and facilitators of escalation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets