Briefing Session. January 2018 /

Similar documents
Incident Management Framework. Care Compassion Trust Learning

Learning from Deaths Policy. This policy applies Trust wide

Safe Care and Support

MORTALITY REVIEW POLICY

National Framework for NHS Continuing Healthcare and NHS-funded Nursing Care in England. Core Values and Principles

Systems Analysis Investigation of Incidents Quick Reference Guide

Learning from Deaths Policy A Framework for Identifying, Reporting, Investigating and Learning from Deaths in Care.

National Standards for the Conduct of Reviews of Patient Safety Incidents

The State Hospitals Board for Scotland. Transfer/Discharge Care Programme Approach (CPA) and Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA)

Internal Audit. Health and Safety Governance. November Report Assessment

SUBJECT: QUALITY ASSURANCE AND IMPROVEMENT

Pressure Ulcers A Practical Guide for Review

A Case Review Process for NHS Trusts and Foundation Trusts

Our next phase of regulation A more targeted, responsive and collaborative approach

PROCEDURE Health and Safety - Incident Investigation. Number: J 0103 Date Published: 12 June 2017

INTEGRATION SCHEME (BODY CORPORATE) BETWEEN WEST DUNBARTONSHIRE COUNCIL AND GREATER GLASGOW HEALTH BOARD

QUALITY STRATEGY

RQIA Provider Guidance Nursing Homes

Patient Safety. At the heart of all we do

What does governance look like in homecare?

Health and Safety Policy

Debbie Edwards Interim Deputy Director of Nursing Gail Naylor- Executive Director of Nursing & Midwifery. Safety & Quality Committee

Being Open and Duty of Candour Policy

Tusla Incident Management Policy and Procedure. (Incorporating the procedure for Need to Know and National Review Panel notifications)

A fresh start for registration. Improving how we register providers of all health and adult social care services

RQIA Provider Guidance Independent Clinic Private Doctor Service

Date 4 th September 2015 Dr Ruth Charlton, Joint Medical Director / Jill Down, Associate Director of Quality Laura Rowe, Compliance Manager

SERIOUS INCIDENT REPORTING & MANAGEMENT POLICY

Sample CHO Primary Care Division Quality and Safety Committee. Terms of Reference

Serious Incident Management Policy

RQIA Provider Guidance Independent Clinic Private Doctor Service

14 th May Pharmacy Voice. 4 Bloomsbury Square London WC1A 2RP T E

Policy for the Reporting and Management of Serious Incidents and Never Events

CLINICAL AND CARE GOVERNANCE STRATEGY

Executive Director of Nursing and Chief Operating Officer

The Code Standards of conduct, performance and ethics for chiropractors. Effective from 30 June 2016

An independent thematic review of investigations into the care and treatment provided to service users who committed a homicide and to a victim of

Moving and Handling Policy

FIVE TESTS FOR THE NHS LONG-TERM PLAN

Document Details Title

COMMISSIONING FOR QUALITY FRAMEWORK

Appendix 1 MORTALITY GOVERNANCE POLICY

Indicators for the Delivery of Safe, Effective and Compassionate Person Centred Service

The NHS Constitution

THE STATE HOSPITALS BOARD FOR SCOTLAND. The Care Programme Approach (CPA) A policy for the care and treatment planning of patients.

NHS continuing health care joint dispute resolution procedure

Learning from Deaths Policy LISTEN LEARN ACT TO IMPROVE

Pressure ulcers: revised definition and measurement. Summary and recommendations

INTRODUCTION TO THE UK PUBLIC HEALTH REGISTER ROUTE TO REGISTRATION FOR PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTITIONERS

EDS 2. Making sure that everyone counts Initial Self-Assessment

Quality Assurance Framework Adults Services. Framework. Version: 1.2 Effective from: August 2016 Review date: June 2017

Serious Incident Management Policy and Procedure

NHS 111 Clinical Governance Information Pack

All Trust staff (Hospital and Community) Adverse incidents and near misses. Governance Department Approved

Mortality Policy. Learning from Deaths

Incidents reported to MERU, HSE in Diagnostic Radiology (including Nuclear Medicine) and in Radiotherapy The MERU, HSE (2013)

North School of Pharmacy and Medicines Optimisation Strategic Plan

Meeting of Bristol Clinical Commissioning Group Governing Body. Title: Bristol CCG Management of Serious Incidents Agenda Item: 17

Disability Awareness Grant Scheme Promoting Positive Attitudes to. People with Disabilities. Guidance Manual for Grant Applications 2016

Version: 3.0. Effective from: 29/08/2012

Consultant and Speciality and Associate Specialists (SAS) Doctor Job Planning Procedure

Developing. National Service Frameworks

Status: Information Discussion Assurance Approval. Claire Gorzanski, Head of Clinical Effectiveness

Quality and Safety Committees

2020 Objectives July 2016

Policy for the Reporting and Management of Incidents Including Serious Incidents. Version Number: 006

Report to the Merton Clinical Commissioning Group Board

Unannounced Care Inspection Report 23 October Home Instead Senior Care (NI) Limited

RQIA Escalation Policy and Procedure

Patient Experience Strategy

Policy: A4 Alcohol and Illicit Drugs Procedure (Broadmoor Hospital only)

Physiotherapy Assistant Band 3

Document Title Clinical Risk Assessment and Management Policy. Electronic Systems Development & Training Consultant Risk and Assurance Facilitator

Vision 3. The Strategy 6. Contracts 12. Governance and Reporting 12. Conclusion 14. BCCG 2020 Strategy 15

BSc (Hons) Nursing Mental Health

CO119, Learning from Deaths policy

Action required: To agree the process by which Governors will meet with the inspection team.

National Public Health Nurse Transfer Policy. Frequently Asked Questions

February New Zealand Health and Disability Services National Reportable Events Policy 2012

Drainage of Abdominal Ascites

Children, Families & Community Health Service Quality Assurance Framework

SCHEDULE 2 THE SERVICES

Primary Care Commissioning Next Steps to Delegated Commissioning September Board Paper. 2.0 Delegated Opportunities, Benefits and Risks

Positive and Safe Management of Post incident Support and Debrief. Ron Weddle Deputy Director, Positive and Safe Care

Safeguarding Children Annual Report April March 2016

Practice Guidance: Large Scale Investigations

Quality of Care Approach Quality assurance to drive improvement

Staff Health, Safety and Wellbeing Strategy

Quality Strategy and Improvement Plan

Learning from Deaths Policy

RQIA Provider Guidance Day Care Settings

Learning from Deaths Policy

JOB DESCRIPTION. To support and give advice to frontline operational crews in their decision making.

Management of Diagnostic Testing and Screening Procedures Policy

Central Alerting System (CAS) Policy

Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent Adult Safeguarding Partnership Board Safeguarding Adult Reviews (SAR) Protocol

Document Title: Document Number:

JOB DESCRIPTION. Director of Midwifery / Nursing. Department of Midwifery / Nursing. Director of Midwifery / Nursing

Inspections of children s homes

DRAFT Optimal Care Pathway

Transcription:

Briefing Session 1

Changes as a result of Melissa s Story Guidelines for the management of early pregnancy complications developed by the HSE Clinical Programme for Obs & Gynae All Maternity units have a dedicated Early Pregnancy Assessment Unit 2 nd ultrasound required to confirm a diagnosis of miscarriage MDT training for all staff involved in early pregnancy care available Each unit required to develop a policy and a service for supporting women who have suffered a miscarriage Metric on Irish Maternity Information System (IMIS) reported monthly 2

Context for Change Learning from the management to high profile serious incidents National Policy for Open Disclosure National Standards for the Conduct of Patient Safety Incident Reviews Civil Liability (Amendment ) Act 2017 Part 4 Open Disclosure of Patient Safety Incidents Forthcoming Health Information Bill Mandatory Reportable Events 3

Before we started, we listened To service users and families To frontline staff To QPS Advisors To managers at all levels To key stakeholder groups 4

What they said. Patients and Families Adequacy of response Compassion and care Information (immediate and on-going) Involvement and support with investigations Length of time investigations take Complexity of reports That many reports do not address the concerns or questions they have 5

What they said Frontline Staff Adequacy of response Support in the aftermath of an incident Investigation process can be very stressful Length of time investigations take Outcome of investigation Changes as a result of investigation 6

What they said Managers and QPS Staff Timeframes for decision making in the aftermath of an incident i.e. within 24 hours Decisions in relation to alternate pathways for reviews/investigations Complexity of investigation process Quality of recommendations made was variable Time taken to complete the process versus the KPI of 120 days 7

What we learnt Importance of the period immediately following identification of an incident Need for a graduated and proportionate approach to review Need for a compassionate, timely and supportive response to families and staff Review must balance the technical analysis of the incident with the needs of those affected Quality of recommendations in many reports are poor and often difficult to implement 8

Developing the Incident Management Framework Establishment of Co-Design Group Visit to Healthcare Improvement Scotland Visit to NHS Tayside Blank page development of each step Reality testing of each step throughout the process Consultation with approx 500 individuals and groups Support from Patients for Patient Safety Ireland Consultation with the NJC Policies and Procedures Sub-group Review and sign-off by HSE Leadership Team 9

When to use the Framework? Not everything reported on an incident report form is an incident Incidents may also be reported through alternate routes Need to adopt a no wrong door approach Need to ensure that any issue reported through any route is correctly located for review 10

Incident Management Framework Documents 11

Incident Management Framework Documents 12

Who does the Incident Management Framework apply to? The IMF applies to all incidents occurring in publicly funded health and social care services provided in Ireland including but not limited to: Hospital Groups Community Health Organisations National Ambulance Service National Services e.g. National Screening Services, National Transport Medicine Programme HSE Funded Care e.g. Section 38/39 agencies 13

Principles upon which the Incident Management Framework is based Person Centred Fair and Just Openness and Transparency Responsive Improvement Focused Learning Care Compassion Trust Learning 14

HSE Values in Action Nowhere are the HSE Values tested more than in the aftermath of an incident 15

Incident Management Six Step Process 1. Prevention through supporting a culture where safety is a priority 2. Identification and immediate actions required (for persons directly affected and to minimise risk of further harm to others) 3. Initial reporting and notification 4. Assessment and categorisation 5. Review and analysis 6. Improvement planning and monitoring 16

Step1. Prevention through supporting a culture where safety is a priority. Key messages 1. Clear leadership at all levels to support a culture of quality and safety 2. Anticipate and manage risk which may lead to incidents 3. Define structures and processes for incident management 4. Integrate your quality and safety information to enhance its effectiveness 17

Step1. Prevention through supporting a culture where safety is a priority. Key messages 1. Clear leadership at all levels to support a culture of quality and safety 2. Anticipate and manage risk which may lead to incidents 3. Define structures and processes for incident management 4. Integrate your quality and safety information to enhance its effectiveness 18

Managing Risk in your area of responsibility Anticipate Vigilance Respond Learn and Improve https://www.hse.ie/eng/about/qav D/riskmanagement/riskmanagement-documentation 19

Step 2 - Identification and immediate actions Key Messages 1. Minimise impact of the incident on person harmed 2. Take any actions immediately required to prevent the risk of recurrence to others. 3. Identify and support the needs of persons affected 4. Initiate Open Disclosure process 5. Factually document incident and care provided in service user healthcare record. 6. Appoint service user/family and staff liaison persons 20

Step 2 - Identification and immediate actions Key Messages 1. Minimise impact of the incident on person harmed 2. Take any actions immediately required to prevent the risk of recurrence to others. 3. Identify and support the needs of persons affected 4. Initiate Open Disclosure process 5. Factually document incident and care provided in service user healthcare record. 6. Appoint service user/family and staff liaison persons 21

Supporting those who are affected e.g. Service Users and Families Role of Line Manager critical in maintaining trust and restoring confidence Ensure all immediate care required is provided Providing a caring and compassionate response Open Disclosure Listening to their concerns and queries Ensuring a named Liaison person is identified to keep them informed throughout the process 22

Supporting those who are affected Staff Staff are the second victims and can suffer guilt, shame and a sense of isolation. They need line manages to provide; Acknowledgement of the impact of incidents on them Immediate support and reassurance Information about what happens next Identification of who to link for if they need to talk Continued support throughout review process including how to access formal support mechanisms e.g. EAP 23

An adverse event does not necessarily break down trust between people involved in an incident and the service, rather it is the way a service responds to an incident which does Respectful Management of Serious Clinical Adverse Events (Institute for Healthcare Improvement) 24

Effect of Loss of Trust on the Review Process Level of independence required for review Loss of Trust 25

Effect of Loss of Trust on the Review Process Level of independence required for review Optimal Loss of Trust 26

Effect of Loss of Trust on the Review Process Level of independence required for review Optimal Loss of Trust 27

Step 3. Initial reporting and notification Key Messages 1. Report incidents within 24 hours of their identification 2. Notification of Serious Incidents to the SAO within 24 hours of identification. 3. Report all incidents on the National Incident Management System (NIMS) as soon as possible (using NIRF forms). 4. Meet external reporting requirements within timeframes designated. 28

Step 3. Initial reporting and notification Key Messages 1. Report incidents within 24 hours of their identification 2. Notification of Serious Incidents to the SAO within 24 hours of identification. 3. Report all incidents on the National Incident Management System (NIMS) as soon as possible (using NIRF forms). 4. Meet external reporting requirements within timeframes designated. 29

Step 4. Categorisation and Initial Assessment Line manager confirms the level of harm relating to the outcome of the incident. The level of harm informs the categorisation of the incident. Incidents are categorised as follows: 1. Category 1 Major/Extreme 2. Category 2 Moderate 3. Category 3 Minor/Negligible 30

Step 4. Category 1 Incidents and SREs Category 1 Incidents Must be notified to the SAO within 24 hours Referral to SIMT for decision making in relation to review Governance of Category 1 incidents remains with SIMT until process complete All SIs require priority inputting on NIMS and if the SI is also an SRE this must be identified on NIMS. Serious Reportable Events Where an SRE results in a Category 1 outcome it follows the process of for Category 1 incidents. Where an SRE does not result in a Category 1 outcome it does not require referral to SIMT for decision making in relation to review but decisions not to review must be documented and ratified by the QPS Committee. All SRE s require identification on NIMS and priority inputting. 31

Step 4. Category 1 Incidents and SREs Category 1 Incidents Must be notified to the SAO within 24 hours Referral to SIMT for decision making in relation to review Governance of Category 1 incidents remains with SIMT until process complete All SIs require priority inputting on NIMS and if the SI is also an SRE this must be identified on NIMS. Serious Reportable Events Where an SRE results in a Category 1 outcome it follows the process of for Category 1 incidents. Where an SRE does not result in a Category 1 outcome it does not require referral to SIMT for decision making in relation to review but decisions not to review must be documented and ratified by the QPS Committee. All SRE s require identification on NIMS and priority inputting. 32

Decisions to be made by the SIMT Based on information provided and discussions at the SIMT a decision is taken whether a review is required? If it is decided that a review is required the following decisions are taken, Level of Review Approach to Review Level of Independence attaching to the Review process If it is decided that a review is not required the decision must be ratified by the QPS Committee SIMT decisions in relation to review must be communicated back to the service in which the incident occurred. 33

Levels and Approaches to Review Level of Review Comprehensive Approaches to Review 1. Systems Analysis (Review Team Approach) 2. Systems Analysis (Review Panel Approach) Concise 1. Systems Analysis (Facilitated Multi-Disciplinary Team Approach) 2. Systems Analysis (Desktop Approach) 3. Incident Specific Review Tool e.g. Falls and Pressure Ulcers 4. After Action Review Aggregate 1. Systems Analysis (Aggregate Approach) 34

Levels and Approaches to Review Level of Review Comprehensive Approaches to Review 1. Systems Analysis (Review Team Approach) 2. Systems Analysis (Review Panel Approach) Concise 1. Systems Analysis (Facilitated Multi-Disciplinary Team Approach) 2. Systems Analysis (Desktop Approach) 3. Incident Specific Review Tool e.g. Falls and Pressure Ulcers 4. After Action Review Aggregate 1. Systems Analysis (Aggregate Approach) 35

Application of Systems Analysis Prior to the Incident Management Framework Review Team Approach Systems Analysis 36

Application of Systems Analysis in the Incident Management Framework Review Team Approach Aggregate Review Approach Systems Analysis Review Panel Approach All approaches are underpinned by systems thinking and a systems analysis approach Incident Specific Tool MDT Approach Desktop Approach 37

After Action Review An After Action Review (AAR) is a structured, facilitated discussion of an event which focuses on 4 Questions What did you expect to happen? What actually happened? Why was there a difference? What have we learnt? In the context of incident management it can be used to de-brief staff in the aftermath of a Category 1 incident or as a review approach in Category 2 & 3 incidents. Simulation based training developed in collaboration with University College Hospital London and the Institute for Leadership RCSI. 38

Emphasis on a multidisciplinary involvement in the review process MDT involvement a key feature of: Review Panel Approach Multidisciplinary Team Approach Incident Specific Review Tools After Action Review 39

Step 5. Review and Analysis Failure to correct systems issues will result in them failing again. Safety management is underpinned by learning and improvement. Review must be undertaken in a systematic and structured way which looks beyond the particular incident. The process must be : Supportive, Open and Fair Follow the principles of natural justice and fair procedures. Review must identify both the things that could be improved with the areas of good performance. It should not be viewed as a negative process. 40

Step 5. Review and Analysis Failure to correct systems issues will result in them failing again. Safety management is underpinned by learning and improvement. Review must be undertaken in a systematic and structured way which looks beyond the particular incident. The process must be : Supportive, Open and Fair Follow the principles of natural justice and fair procedures. Review must identify both the things that could be improved with the areas of good performance. It should not be viewed as a negative process. 41

Quality Assuring Review Reports prior to their Finalisation The process seeks to ensure that The scope and process applied was in line with the terms of reference. The process conformed with the principles of fair procedures and natural justice. There are clear linkages between the findings and the recommendations made. The recommendations are SMART. The purpose is one of assuring quality to enable closure and support the implementation of recommendations rather than to question the findings of the review. 42

Step 6. Improvement Planning and Monitoring Key messages 1. An improvement plan should be developed to take account of the actions required to implement recommendations arising from a review 2. A master improvement plan should be in place within a service to enable the effective monitoring of actions identified from a range of sources 3. Reports relating to thematic learning should be collated to assist and inform the wider service improvement programmes 43

Our commitment Next steps Identify support needs by engaging through divisions Tailor response Develop training, guidance and tools What we need from you Consistent and compassionate leadership Reflect and discuss with your colleagues and teams Consider changes that might be needed Work with us on implementation plan 44

Launch of service user falls and pressure ulcer review guides Revised systems analysis guidance Training online / systems analysis / AAR Videos staff and service user Engagement service users, CHOs and hospital groups 45

Discussion 46