Chapter 21
Quality Improvement and Patient Safety
Kathleen M. Werner, MS, BSN, RN
After studying this chapter, the reader will be able to:
1. Apply principles of quality management to the role of the professional nurse.
2. Analyze the basis for the increasing emphasis on health care quality and medical errors.
3. Analyze the role of health care regulatory agencies and how they have embodied the principles of quality management.
4. Discuss the role process improvement can play in ensuring patient safety and improving quality in the health care system.
5. Describe the tools and skills necessary for successful quality management activities.
6. Discuss the professional nurse’s role in promoting patient safety.
Tool that is used for identifying and organizing possible causes of a problem in a structured format. It is sometimes called a fishbone diagram because it looks like the skeleton of a fish.
Measurable items that reflect the quality of care provided and demonstrate the degree to which desired clinical outcomes are accomplished; clinical indicators help identify the goals of quality improvement.
Standardized sets of valid, reliable, and evidence-based quality measures used by The Joint Commission to integrate performance measures into the accreditation process and overall quality improvement processes.
Individual or group who relies on an organization to provide a product or service to meet some need or expectation. It is these customer needs and expectations that determine quality.
Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA)
A systematic process for identifying potential design and process failures before they occur, with the intent to eliminate them or minimize the risk associated with them.
Picture of the sequence of steps in a process. Different steps or actions are represented by boxes or other symbols. A top-down flowchart shows the sequence of steps in a job or process. It can have different levels of detail. A deployment flowchart shows the detailed steps in a process and the people or departments that are involved in each step.
(Hospital-acquired condition) A term used to indicate an unintended and typically adverse patient-acquired condition occurring as a result of being cared for in a hospital.
National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine; a nonprofit organization with a mission of advancing and disseminating scientific knowledge to improve human health. The institute provides objective, timely, authoritative information and advice concerning health and science policy to the government, the corporate sector, the professions, and the public.
Institute for Safe Medication Practices; a nonprofit organization that is well known as an education resource for the prevention of medication errors.
A national agency that conducts surveys of inpatient and ambulatory facilities and certifies their compliance with established quality standards.
An integrated system of principles, practices, tools, and techniques focused on reducing waste, synchronizing workflows, and managing variability in production flows. Originally developed by Toyota and other Japanese companies and now adopted by the health care sector.
National Committee for Quality Assurance; an accreditation body that has become the primary group that accredits health plans.
Serious adverse events during an inpatient stay that should never occur or are reasonably preventable through adherence to evidence-based guidelines. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, through revisions in coverage and payment policies, provide hospitals with financial incentives to reduce the occurrence of never events.
A graphic tool that helps break down a big problem into its parts and then identifies which parts are the most important.
Series of linked steps necessary to accomplish work. A process turns inputs, such as information or raw materials, into outputs, such as products, services, and reports. Clinical processes are a series of linked steps necessary for the provision of patient care. It is through the improvement of processes that an organization improves its work and sustains itself.
The differences in how the steps in a work process might be accomplished and/or the variables that may affect each step in the process. Variation results from the lack of perfect uniformity in the performance of any process. Understanding variation in a process is necessary to determine the direction that improvement efforts must take.
Philosophic framework for managing organizations that recognizes quality is determined by customer needs and expectations. Attention is paid to how the work is done, with an emphasis on involving the people who best understand the detail of the work processes with which they are involved. Health care QM is specifically related to the quality of health care services provided.
Defined by TJC (2011) as a process for identifying the basic or causal factors that underlie variation in performance, including the occurrence or possible occurrence of a sentinel event. A root cause analysis focuses primarily on systems and processes, not individual performance.
Graph of data in time order that help identify any changes that occur over time; also called a time plot. A run chart that has a centerline and statistical control limits added is known as a control chart. Control limits help detect specific types of change in a process.
Defined by TJC (2011) as an unexpected occurrence involving patient death or serious physical or psychological injury or the risk thereof. Serious injury specifically includes loss of limb or function. The phrase “or the risk thereof” includes any process variation for which a recurrence would carry a significant chance of a serious adverse outcome. Such events are called sentinel because they signal the need for immediate investigation and response.
A concept for company-wide quality improvement that was first introduced by Motorola Corporation in 1987 and is characterized by its customer-driven approach, emphasis on decision making based on careful analysis of quantitative data, and a priority on cost reduction.
Approach to process improvement that involves developing and adhering to best-known methods and repeating key tasks in the same way, time and time again, until a better way is found, thereby creating exceptional service with maximal efficiency.
Additional resources are available online at:
http://evolve.elsevier.com/Cherry/
VIGNETTE
Suzanne began to reflect on the number of times this may have occurred with other patients. She also began to consider the implications from the lack of a consistent and standardized way to track the dwell time of urinary catheters. As in Mrs. Slattery’s situation, acquiring a urinary tract infection could cost $12,000 to $20,000 in additional expenses for the hospital; it means additional care and treatment with an extended length of stay that is not paid by Mrs. Slattery’s insurance company because the catheter-associated UTI would be deemed an event that should have been prevented. Multiply this cost by just ten additional patients, and suddenly the catheter-associated UTI becomes a significant financial burden for the organization. More important, patients experience discomfort and increased fatigue and run the risk for developing even more complications because of their decreased willingness or ability to cooperate with their postoperative care. In addition, Suzanne was beginning to see the effect this setback had on patients’ perceptions of the hospital. Family members would be anticipating a discharge date that had been planned only to find that there would be a delay. Would patients’ and family members’ perceptions remain with them as they spoke to other friends and family about their hospitalization? Suzanne began to feel more pressed to do something about the situation.
The team met regularly for several weeks and gained a clear understanding of why both physicians and nurses lost “track of time” with respect to removal of these catheters. This was accomplished though the creation of a detailed picture of what typically occurred in writing postoperative orders by the surgical staff and the routine care implemented by nursing personnel. Breakdowns in this process for assuring completeness of all necessary orders were identified, and the group began working on constructive ways to prevent these breakdowns in the future. The team worked with information technology experts to incorporate the indwelling catheter discontinuation order in an electronic order set easily accessible for all physicians. Furthermore, if the discontinuation order was not documented, an electronic alert would be sent to the attending surgeon to remind him or her to either complete the order or document the rationale for not doing so. Likewise, nursing staff would receive an electronic “best practice alert” reminding them to check the orders for this purpose. Over time, with ongoing monitoring of the ordering practices and the catheter-associated UTI rates, significant progress was made up to the point where the infection rates are now nearly zero. Suzanne knows that the proper steps are in place to guarantee that this successful infection reduction effort will be sustained through the thoughtful process that was developed. When her patients are ready for discharge, there will be no setbacks caused by situations that could otherwise have been prevented. Suzanne feels like she is a vested part of this success.
Chapter Overview
Although Suzanne Harper’s story depicted in the vignette seems credible and would be a logical way for any organization to begin addressing customer concerns, far too often this has not been the case. Hospitals and health care organizations have been slow to recognize the necessity of a true customer perspective and to emphasize quality and safety in a proactive manner. Porter and Teisberg (2006), making the case for why competition alone has not resulted in quality care, wrote:
• What is quality in health care?
• Who determines the degree to which quality is evident in our health care system?
• How should the health care system be redesigned to improve quality?
• What do the potential answers to the first three questions mean in relationship to professional nursing accountability?
The Urgent Case for Quality Improvement in the U.S. Health Care System
In an alarming 2000 report by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) titled To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System, authors extrapolated and summarized data from two major studies and concluded that up to 98,000 patients are killed each year from medical errors, confirming that poor quality of care is a major problem in the United States (IOM, 2000). Contributing factors cited in the report included the following:
• Overuse of expensive invasive technology
• Underuse of inexpensive care services
• Error-prone implementation of care that could harm patients and waste money
“The U.S. health care delivery system does not provide consistent, high quality medical care to all people. Americans should be able to count on receiving care that meets their needs and is based on the best scientific knowledge—yet this frequently is not the case. Health care harms too frequently and routinely fails to deliver its potential benefits. Indeed between the health care that we now have and the health care that we could have lies not just a gap, but a chasm” (p. 1).
• On average, patients are subjected to at least one medication error each day with extremely high costs to patients, families, health care professionals, hospitals, and insurance companies (IOM, 2007).
• 49 million nonelderly Americans do not have health insurance and experience gaps in health care, which results in preventable hospitalizations, poor overall health, disability, and premature death (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2011).
• The lag between the discovery of more effective forms of treatment and their incorporation into routine patient care averages 17 years (IOM, 2003).
• Twenty-five percent of patients are not receiving care that is recommended; racial and ethnic minorities generally receive worse care than whites; and poor people receive worse care than high-income people (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [AHRQ], 2010).
• The quality of health care in the United States is suboptimal. Although quality continues to improve slowly, there is a need to accelerate progress to achieve higher-quality and more equitable health care (AHRQ, 2010).
The quality chasm report details six guiding aims for improvement that should be adopted by every individual and group involved in the provision of health care, including health care professionals, public and private health care organizations, purchasers of health care, regulatory agencies and organizations, and state and federal policymakers. These six guiding aims are collectively referred to by the acronym STEEEP. Individually, these aims are for health care to be (IOM, 2001):
• Safe: Preventing injuries to patients from the care that is intended to help them
• Timely: Reducing waits and sometimes harmful delays for both those who receive and those who give care
• Effective: Providing services based on scientific knowledge to all who could benefit, and refraining from providing services to those not likely to benefit
• Efficient: Preventing waste, including waste of equipment, supplies, ideas, and energy
• Equitable: Providing care that does not vary in quality because of personal characteristics, such as gender, ethnicity, geographic location, and socioeconomic status
• Patient centered: Providing care that is respectful of and responsive to individual patient preferences, needs, and values and ensuring that patient values guide all clinical decisions
1. Care is based on continuous healing relationships. Patients should receive care whenever they need it and in many forms, including face-to-face visits, over the Internet, by telephone, and by other means as needed.
2. Care is customized according to patient needs and values. The system should be designed to meet the most common needs, but should also be responsive to individual choices and preferences.
3. The patient is the source of control. Patients should be given the necessary information and opportunity to exercise the degree of control they choose over health care decisions that affect them.
4. Knowledge is shared, and information flows freely. Patients should have unfettered access to their own medical information and to clinical knowledge, with clinicians communicating effectively and sharing information.
5. Decision making is evidence based. Patients should receive care based on the best available scientific knowledge, and care should not vary illogically from clinician to clinician or place to place.
6. Safety is a system property. Patients should be safe; reducing risk and ensuring safety require greater attention to systems that help prevent and mitigate errors.
7. Transparency is necessary. The system should make available to patients and families information that allows them to make informed decisions, including information describing the system’s performance on safety, evidence-based practice, and patient satisfaction.
8. Needs are anticipated. The system should anticipate patient needs rather than simply react to events.
9. Waste is continually decreased. The system should not waste resources (i.e., supplies, health professionals’ time and energy) or patient time.
10. Cooperation among clinicians is a priority. Actively engage in collaboration and communication to ensure an appropriate exchange of information and coordination of care.