Dataset Information

Identifying Risks and Opportunities in Outpatient Surgical Patient Safety: A Qualitative Analysis of Veterans Health Administration Staff Perceptions.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Little is known about patient safety risks in outpatient surgery. Inpatient surgical adverse events (AEs) risk factors include patient- (e.g., advanced age), process- (e.g., inadequate preoperative assessment), or structure-related characteristics (e.g., low surgical volume); however, these factors may differ from outpatient care where surgeries are often elective and in younger/healthier patients. We undertook an exploratory qualitative research project to identify risk factors for AEs in outpatient surgery.

Methods

We developed a conceptual framework of patient, process, and structure factors associated with surgical AEs on the basis of a literature review. This framework informed our semistructured interview guide with (1) open-ended questions about a specific outpatient AE that the participant experienced and (2) outpatient surgical patient safety risk factors in general. We interviewed nationwide Veterans Health Administration surgical staff. Results were coded on the basis of categories in the conceptual framework, and additional themes were identified using content analysis.

Results

Fourteen providers representing diverse surgical roles participated. Ten reported witnessing an AE, and everyone provided input on risk factors in our conceptual framework. We did not find evidence that patient race/age, surgical technique, or surgical volume affected patient safety. Emerging factors included patient compliance, postoperative patient assessments/instruction, operating room equipment needs, and safety culture.

Conclusions

Surgical staff are familiar with AEs and patient safety problems in outpatient surgery. Our results show that processes of care undertaken by surgical providers, as opposed to immutable patient characteristics, may affect the occurrence of AEs. The factors we identified may facilitate more targeted research on outpatient surgical AEs.

SUBMITTER: Mull HJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8445239 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRadon is a high impact environmental pollutant and is the second leading cause of lung cancer in Canada. Building design, extended winter, and geographical location expose residents of Ottawa-Gatineau (the national capital region in Canada) to an increased risk. It is surprising that residents have an inadequate awareness of the risk - despite its gravity - and have taken minimum preventive actions. This study explores perceptions of radon health risk and examines the factors that enable and hinder the adoption of preventive measures among Ottawa-Gatineau residents.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 35 residents with varying educational and income levels to inquire about their knowledge and perception of radon, and to explore their views of enablers and obstacles to taking action to reduce radon risks. Thematic, inductive data analysis was undertaken.ResultsThe results indicate that: 1) Residents obtained information on radon from various sources that include the media, their education or occupation, their social network, and home renovation events. Limited references were made to the National Radon Program responsible for testing for radon and informing residents. 2) Awareness of radon risk varied, and the knowledge retained by some residents is insufficient to adequately protect their health. 3) Enablers for taking protective action included: having an understanding of the risk along with health consciousness; caring for family and children; knowing others who had contracted lung cancer and having financial resources. Obstacles consisted of: lack of awareness; cost; lack of home ownership; and potential difficulty in selling the house. 4) Residents attributed primary responsibility to public agencies for disseminating information, and incentivizing or mandating action through more stringent regulation.ConclusionRisk perceptions are subjective, and are influenced by micro and macro level factors. Inducing protective action to reduce risk requires comprehensive interventions taking into account the dual cognitive and emotional aspects of risk perception. Future research may explore the dual aspects of risk perception and examine the contents of the risk communication message. Policy should address the responsibility of both governments and residents in tackling the issue.