ObjectiveWe aimed to investigate the perception of the implementation success of reporting and learning systems in German hospitals, the perceived relevance of the implementation outcomes and whether and how these implementation outcomes are monitored. An reporting and learning system is a tool used worldwide for patient safety that identifies and analyses critical events, errors, risks and near misses in healthcare.MethodsA pretested exploratory cross-sectional online survey was conducted with reporting and learning system experts from 51 acute care hospitals. For communicative validation, the results were discussed in person in an expert panel discussion (N=23).ResultsFifty-three per cent (n=27) of the participants (N=51) of the online survey perceived that their reporting and learning system was being comprehensively and successfully implemented. However, no service or patient outcomes were reported to ultimately capture the concept of implementation success. Most of the participants reported a (high) relevance of the implementation outcomes’ acceptability and sustainability. In total, 44 measures were provided to monitor implementation outcomes. However, most of the quantitative measures were based on the (relative) number of entered reports. Qualitative measures were reported in relation to the ‘quality of the report’. In general, the measures were poorly specified.ConclusionThere is an underestimated need to develop validated ‘implementation patient safety indicator(s) (sets)’ to monitor implementation outcomes of reporting and learning systems. We also identified a potential need to facilitate awareness of the concept of implementation success and its relevance for patient safety. Drafts of indicators that could be used as a starting point for the further development of ‘implementation patient safety indicators’ were provided.

Purpose To assess digital patient briefing as an alternative to conventional paper documentation. Materials and Methods 502 patients with a planned computed tomography (CT) examination were selected for digital patient briefing using the E-ConsentPro software from Thieme Compliance on an iPad by Apple (Cupertino, California, USA). For the analysis, three age groups were formed. The time required for the patient briefing, the number of open questions as well as the time needed for discussion with physicians were determined. Student’s t-test was performed to assess statistical significance. Results There was no significant difference between patient age and briefing time which was about 20 minutes on average. The number of open or unclear questions increased with patient age. While patients younger than 30 years of age had about 2 open questions, patients over 30 and 60 years had about 4 and 5 questions, respectively. The total time needed for discussion with physicians was less than 2 minutes on average. A significant difference in the time required for discussion with physicians could not be observed between the individual age groups. Conclusion Tablet-based digital briefing allows the storage of patient documents with reasonable time and effort. Furthermore, it minimizes the risk of data loss. Key Points  Citation Format

No abstract

No abstract