Managing gaps in the continuity of nursing care to enhance patient safety
Introduction
Nurses are widely recognised as being inseparably linked to patient safety and an indispensable ‘front line’ defence that protects patients from the harmful effects of healthcare errors and preventable adverse events (Page, 2004). Gaps, defined for the purposes of this study as ‘discontinuities’ or breakdowns in the continuity of patient care, are prevalent in health care and increase the risk of preventable adverse events (Cook, Render, & Woods, 2000). Gaps often occur with a change of shift or health care provider or when a patient transfers to another unit or organisation, however, gaps may also emerge within the processes of patient care and with single practitioners (Cook et al., 2000). In hospital settings, gaps are spawned by the complex nature of patient care and the intricate network of individuals, professions, departments and shifts of work that provide care over a twenty four hour period (Krogstad, Hofoss, & Hjortdahl, 2002).
Health care providers, including nurses, are generally successful at identifying and managing gaps and re-establishing the continuity of patient care (Cook et al., 2000). Hence, it is argued that safety might be increased by understanding and reinforcing the ability of health care providers to successfully manage gaps in patient care. It is acknowledged that several studies have focussed on gaps that contribute to adverse events (i.e. gaps in clinical handover, teamwork, communication, and failure-to-rescue) (Johnson & Barach, 2009; Manser, 2009; Taenzer, Pyke, & McGrath, 2011; Weller, Boyd, & Cumin, 2014). However, there is a paucity of published research that specifically explores and describes the types of gaps that nurses encounter in clinical contexts and how they identify and manage gaps to keep patients safe. A key aim of this study is to redress this oversight.
Section snippets
Background
Over the past decade, efforts to address the pressing global challenge of preventable patient harm have conventionally focussed on ascertaining the root causes of adverse events to determine ‘what went wrong’ and implementing system changes to reduce the risk of further adverse outcomes. This approach, labelled Safety-I, has contributed to valuable learnings and improvements in patient safety (Braithwaite, Wears, & Hollnagel, 2015). Concerns have been raised, however, about the utility of ‘find
Study design
The study was undertaken using a qualitative exploratory descriptive (QED) research method informed by the works of Patton (2002) and Sandelowski (2000). The study was approved by the Human Research and Ethics Committee at [Deakin University] and one metropolitan health service at which participant recruitment and interviewing occurred.
Setting
The participants in this study were nurses employed in emergency, critical care, perioperative, neuroscience, and rehabilitation and transitional care units in
Gaps
Clustering of the analysed data into themes within each of the research questions generated rich descriptions of what participants considered a ‘gap’ to be as well as the processes used to identify and manage the gaps in their everyday practice. These findings are each considered under separate subheadings below. The numbers in brackets indicate the de-identified numerically coded transcript and page number from which the quote is taken.
Discussion
Commensurate with the views of Cook et al. (2000), the study found that the identification and management of gaps is based on nurses’ knowledge, understanding and experience of: where gaps occur; the types of gaps that occur; the things that happen, go wrong and are overlooked; the clinical environment; available equipment; and correct processes and procedures (Fig. 1). The study has also captured ‘resilience’ in its different forms as described by Westrum (2006). Westrum’s taxonomy encompasses
Limitations
A key strength of this study is the contribution it makes to a deeper understanding of ‘safety successes’ in nursing. A limitation of the study is that it had as its focus nurses only thus the views of doctors and other co-workers who benefitted from the nurse interventions were not captured. A comparative inquiry into the perceptions and experiences of other members of the heath care team about the nature and impact of the nurse interventions would strengthen the conclusions of this study.
Conclusion
Patient safety initiatives have conventionally focussed on adverse events, ascertaining their root causes via structured processes such as root cause analysis and determining what went ‘wrong’. This study has demonstrated that valuable lessons can be learned from the investigation of how nurses identify and manage gaps and ‘get it right’. The study provides a rich description of effective nursing surveillance and successful everyday nursing performance in hospital settings. The elements of
Acknowledgments
The research was supported by an Australian Postgraduate Award and a Research Scholarship from the Australian College of Nursing. Maxine Duke contributed to the supervision of the PhD study which this manuscript reports. Angela Jones and Megan-Jane Johnstone have no competing interests or conflicts of interest to declare.
Conflict of interest
No conflict of interest has been declared by the authors.
References (34)
- et al.
A “near-miss” model for describing the nurse’s role in the recovery of medical errors
Journal of Professional Nursing
(2004) - et al.
Strategies used by nurses to recover medical errors in an academic emergency department setting
Applied Nursing Research
(2006) - et al.
A model of recovering medical errors in the coronary care unit
Heart & Lung
(2008) - et al.
Recovery from medical errors: The critical care nursing safety net
Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety
(2006) - et al.
Prevalence of adverse events in the hospitals of five Latin American countries: Results of the Iberoamerican study of adverse events
BMJ Quality & Safety
(2011) - et al.
The Canadian adverse events study: The incidence of adverse events among hospital patients in Canada
Canadian Medical Association Journal
(2004) - et al.
Resilient health care: Turning patient safety on its head
International Journal for Quality in Health Care
(2015) - et al.
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Qualitative Research in Psychology
(2006) Email interviewing: Generating data with a vulnerable population
Journal of Advanced Nursing
(2012)- et al.
Gaps in the continuity of care and progress on patient safety
British Medical Journal
(2000)
Strategies used by critical care nurses to identify, interrupt, and correct medical errors
American Journal of Critical Care
Surveillance: A strategy for improving patient safety in acute and critical care units
Critical Care Nurse
Proactive approaches to safety management
Safety-1 and safety-II: The past and future of safety management
Prologue: The scope of resilience engineering
Patient care handovers: What will it take to ensure quality and safety during times of transition
Medical Journal of Australia
Recognising and responding to 'cutting corners' when providing nursing care: a qualitative study
Journal of Clinical Nursing
Cited by (8)
Causes and effects of theory-practice gap during clinical practice: the lived experiences of baccalaureate nursing students
2023, International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-beingCompleteness documentation of fall risk management: A cross-sectional study
2022, Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery ResearchAssessing nurses’ satisfaction with continuity of care and the case management model as an indicator of quality of care in Spain
2021, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health