There is a growing impetus to reorganize the hospital discharge process to reduce avoidable readmissions and costs. The aim of this study was to provide insight into hospital discharge problems and underlying causes, and to give an overview of solutions that guide providers and policy-makers in improving hospital discharge. The Intervention Mapping framework was used. First, a problem analysis studying the scale, causes, and consequences of ineffective hospital discharge was carried out. The analysis was based on primary data from 26 focus group interviews and 321 individual interviews with patients and relatives, and involved hospital and community care providers. Second, improvements in terms of intervention outcomes, performance objectives and change objectives were specified. Third, 220 experts were consulted and a systematic review of effective discharge interventions was carried out to select theory-based methods and practical strategies required to achieve change and better performance. Ineffective discharge is related to factors at the level of the individual care provider, the patient, the relationship between providers, and the organisational and technical support for care providers. Providers can reduce hospital readmission rates and adverse events by focusing on high-quality discharge information, well-coordinated care, and direct and timely communication with their counterpart colleagues. Patients, or their carers, should participate in the discharge process and be well aware of their health status and treatment. Assessment by hospital care providers whether discharge information is accurate and understood by patients and their community counterparts, are important examples of overcoming identified barriers to effective discharge. Discharge templates, medication reconciliation, a liaison nurse or pharmacist, regular site visits and teach-back are identified as effective and promising strategies to achieve the desired behavioural and environmental change. This study provides a comprehensive guiding framework for providers and policy-makers to improve patient handover from hospital to primary care.

Despite evidence supporting the effectiveness of best practices in infection prevention and management, many healthcare workers fail to implement them and evidence-based practices tend to be underused in routine practice. Prevention and management of infections across the surgical pathway should always focus on collaboration among all healthcare workers sharing knowledge of best practices. To clarify key issues in the prevention and management of infections across the surgical pathway, a multidisciplinary task force of experts convened in Ancona, Italy, on May 31, 2019, for a national meeting. This document represents the executive summary of the final statements approved by the expert panel.

Background: In response to the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, healthcare systems worldwide have stepped up their infection prevention and control efforts in order to reduce the spread of the infection. Behaviours, such as hand hygiene, screening and cohorting of patients, and the appropriate use of antibiotics have long been recommended in surgery, but their implementation has often been patchy. Methods: The current crisis presents an opportunity to learn about how to improve infection prevention and control and surveillance (IPCS) behaviours. The improvements made were mainly informal, quick and stemming from the frontline rather than originating from formal organizational structures. The adaptations made and the expertise acquired have the potential for triggering deeper learning and to create enduring improvements in the routine identification and management of infections relating to surgery. Results: This paper aims to illustrate how adopting a human factors and ergonomics perspective can provide insights into how clinical work systems have been adapted and reconfigured in order to keep patients and staff safe. Conclusion: For achieving sustainable change in IPCS practices in surgery during COVID-19 and beyond we need to enhance organizational learning potentials.

Background: Home Parenteral Nutrition (HPN) is a lifesaving clinical care process. However, undetected hazards and vulnerabilities in care transitions from hospital to community care may pose risk to patient’s safety. Avoidable complications and adverse events may hinder the benefits of treatment. Objective: The analysis carried out aims at framing through Human Factors and Ergonomics (HF/E) the critical issues for patient safety related to clinical care practices for HPN in healthcare organization. Methods: We present the results of a proactive risk assessment analysis based on the FMEA methodology (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) carried out in three different areas of the regional health care system of Tuscany, Italy. The clinical risk management and patient safety unit assessed the risk perception of Healthcare Workers (HWs) in regard to patient safety and situational awareness throughout the HPN patient journey. Results: The analysis revealed heterogeneity in the Risk Priority Index (RPI) expressed by HWs. A lower RPI is associated with a HPN process that deploys in continuity between hospital care and community care. A higher RPI is associated with a quality and safety improvement process that is still ongoing. We also observed HWs expressing low RPI in the areas of the region where HPN has a hospital- focused approach and has limited adherence to patient safety requirements. Low RPI for HPN process may relate both to extensively deployed continuity of care and to jeopardized awareness on HPN phases and coordination. The analysis carried out enabled the definition of a common HPN workflow used as reference schema allowing for the definition of a set of recommendations for improving the quality and safety of the care processes. Moreover, the outcome of the proactive risk assessment laid the groundwork for the advancement of the patient safety regional requirements. Conclusion: The analysis had the role of promoting the contextualization of the culture of quality and safety within the HPN process resulting in an improved awareness of the criticalities and the role of nutrition units throughout the care process.

Healthcare-associated infections (HAI) are adverse events exposing patients to a potentially avoidable risk of morbidity and mortality. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is increasingly contributing to the burden of HAIs and emerging as of the most alarming challenges for public health worldwide. Practically, harm mitigation and risk containment demand cross-sectional initiatives incorporate both approaches to infection prevention and control and methodologies from clinical risk management.

Objectives: Thirteen suspicious deaths occurred in an intensive care unit of Tuscany, Italy, in 2015. All patients developed sudden unexplained coagulopathy leading to severe bleeding. None of them had been prescribed heparin, but supertherapeutic concentrations of heparin were found. After a nurse was arrested on suspicion of murdering Human Factor and Ergonomics (HF/E) experts received a mandate to identify system failures. According to the judgment of the Court of First Instance on April 2019, the nurse was found guilty. Methods: The HF/E group used a two-pronged safety analysis: understanding the conditions in which the healthcare practitioners were working in the period when the suspicious deaths emerged and reviewing the clinical records. Results: Fourteen patients admitted to the intensive care unit in 2014 and 2015 were selected on the basis of markedly abnormal coagulation tests (n = 13) or a family member’s complaint (n = 1). In 13 cases, a massive, abrupt hemorrhage in the presence of an unexpected abnormality of coagulation tests occurred, whereas the fourteenth patient had the only prolongation of coagulation markers without bleeding. All cases examined classified as adverse events related to a coagulation disorder. Human factor and ergonomics analysis identified a number of latent and active failures that contributed to the event and provided a set of important recommendations for safety improvement. Conclusions: When presented with a manifest, albeit suspected, wrongdoing with lethal consequences for patients, forensic investigators and safety investigators have distinctly different goals and methods. We believe that a memorandum of understanding between HF/E and forensic investigative teams provides an operative framework for allowing co-existence and fosters collaboration. The pursuit of safe care as a new emerging right for patients and balancing the right to legal justice with the right to safer healthcare merit further investigation and discussion.