Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2012

Open Access 01-12-2012 | Research article

Healthcare system intervention for prevention of birth injuries – process evaluation of self-assessment, peer review, feedback and agreement for change

Authors: Monica E Nyström, Anna Westerlund, Elisabet Höög, Charlotte Millde-Luthander, Ulf Högberg, Charlotta Grunewald

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Patient safety is fundamental in high quality healthcare systems but despite an excellent record of perinatal care in Sweden some children still suffer from substandard care and unnecessary birth injuries. Sustainable patient safety improvements assume changes in key actors’ mental models, norms and culture as well as in the tools, design and organisation of work. Interventions positively affecting team mental models on safety issues are a first step to enhancing change. Our purpose was to study a national intervention programme for the prevention of birth injuries with the aim to elucidate how the main interventions of self-assessment, peer review, feedback and written agreement for change affected the teams and their mental model of patient safety, and thereby their readiness for change. Knowledge of relevant considerations before implementing this type of patient safety intervention series could thereby be increased.

Methods

Eighty participants in twenty-seven maternity units were interviewed after the first intervention sequence of the programme. A content analysis using a priori coding was performed in order to relate results to the anticipated outcomes of three basic interventions: self-assessment, peer review and written feedback, and agreement for change.

Results

The self-assessment procedure was valuable and served as a useful tool for elucidating strengths and weaknesses and identifying areas for improvement for a safer delivery in maternity units. The peer-review intervention was appreciated, despite it being of less value when considering the contribution to explicit outcome effects (i.e. new input to team mental models and new suggestions for actions). The feedback report and the mutual agreement on measures for improvements reached when signing the contract seemed exert positive pressures for change.

Conclusions

Our findings are in line with several studies stressing the importance of self-evaluation by encouraging a thorough review of objectives, practices and outcomes for the continuous improvement of an organisation. Even though effects of the peer review were limited, feedback from peers, or other change agents involved, and the support that a clear and well-structured action plan can provide are considered to be two important complements to future self-assessment procedures related to patient safety improvement.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Youngberg BJ: Event reporting: the value of a nonpunitive approach. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2008, 51 (4): 647-655. 10.1097/GRF.0b013e3181899a05.CrossRefPubMed Youngberg BJ: Event reporting: the value of a nonpunitive approach. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2008, 51 (4): 647-655. 10.1097/GRF.0b013e3181899a05.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Pfeffer J: Sutton, R: The knowing-doing gap: how smart companies turn knowledge into action. 2000, Harvard Business School Press, Boston Pfeffer J: Sutton, R: The knowing-doing gap: how smart companies turn knowledge into action. 2000, Harvard Business School Press, Boston
3.
go back to reference Lenfant C: Shattuck lecture–clinical research to clinical practice–lost in translation?. N Engl J Med. 2003, 349 (9): 868-874. 10.1056/NEJMsa035507.CrossRefPubMed Lenfant C: Shattuck lecture–clinical research to clinical practice–lost in translation?. N Engl J Med. 2003, 349 (9): 868-874. 10.1056/NEJMsa035507.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Nyström M: Characteristics of Health Care Organizations Associated With Learning and Development: Lessons From a Pilot Study. Quality Management in Health Care. 2009, 18 (4): 285-294.CrossRefPubMed Nyström M: Characteristics of Health Care Organizations Associated With Learning and Development: Lessons From a Pilot Study. Quality Management in Health Care. 2009, 18 (4): 285-294.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Pettigrew A: Whipp, R: Managing change for competitive success. 1993, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford Pettigrew A: Whipp, R: Managing change for competitive success. 1993, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford
6.
go back to reference Berglund S, Pettersson H, Cnattingius S, Grunewald C: How often is a low Apgar score the result of substandard care during labour?. BJOG. 2010, 117 (8): 968-978. 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02565.x.CrossRefPubMedCentral Berglund S, Pettersson H, Cnattingius S, Grunewald C: How often is a low Apgar score the result of substandard care during labour?. BJOG. 2010, 117 (8): 968-978. 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02565.x.CrossRefPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Blickensderfer E, Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E: Theoretical bases for team self-corrections: Fostering shared mental models. Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work team. Edited by: Beyerlein MM. 1997, Elsevier Science/JAI Press, US, 249-279. 1 Blickensderfer E, Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E: Theoretical bases for team self-corrections: Fostering shared mental models. Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work team. Edited by: Beyerlein MM. 1997, Elsevier Science/JAI Press, US, 249-279. 1
8.
go back to reference Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E: Teamwork competencies; the interaction of team member knowledge, skills and attidtudes. Workforce readiness: competencies and assessment. Edited by: O'Neil H. 1997, Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates, Mahwah, 151-174. 1 Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E: Teamwork competencies; the interaction of team member knowledge, skills and attidtudes. Workforce readiness: competencies and assessment. Edited by: O'Neil H. 1997, Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates, Mahwah, 151-174. 1
9.
go back to reference Jeffery AB, Maes JD, Bratton-Jeffery M-F: Improving team decision-making performance with collaborative modeling. Team Performance Management. 2005, 11 (1/2): 40-50. 10.1108/13527590510584311.CrossRef Jeffery AB, Maes JD, Bratton-Jeffery M-F: Improving team decision-making performance with collaborative modeling. Team Performance Management. 2005, 11 (1/2): 40-50. 10.1108/13527590510584311.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Rouse WB, Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E: The role of mental models in team performance in complex systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, & Cybernetics. 1992, 22 (6): 1296-1308. 10.1109/21.199457.CrossRef Rouse WB, Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E: The role of mental models in team performance in complex systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, & Cybernetics. 1992, 22 (6): 1296-1308. 10.1109/21.199457.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E, Converse S: Shared mental models in expert team decision making. Individual and Group Decision Making. Edited by: Castellan NJ. 1993, Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates, New Jersey, 221-246. Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E, Converse S: Shared mental models in expert team decision making. Individual and Group Decision Making. Edited by: Castellan NJ. 1993, Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates, New Jersey, 221-246.
12.
go back to reference Banks AP, Millward LJ: Running shared mental models as a distributed cognitive process. British Journal of Psychology. 2000, 91 (4): 513-531. 10.1348/000712600161961.CrossRefPubMed Banks AP, Millward LJ: Running shared mental models as a distributed cognitive process. British Journal of Psychology. 2000, 91 (4): 513-531. 10.1348/000712600161961.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Davidson G: The role of mental models in innovative teams. European Journal of Innovation Management. 2005, 8 (4): 409-423. 10.1108/14601060510627795.CrossRef Davidson G: The role of mental models in innovative teams. European Journal of Innovation Management. 2005, 8 (4): 409-423. 10.1108/14601060510627795.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Samuelsson P, Nilsson L-E: Self-assessment practices in large organisations Experiences from using the EFQM excellence model. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. 2002, 19 (1): 10-23. 10.1108/02656710210413426.CrossRef Samuelsson P, Nilsson L-E: Self-assessment practices in large organisations Experiences from using the EFQM excellence model. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. 2002, 19 (1): 10-23. 10.1108/02656710210413426.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Zink K, Schmidt A: Practice and implementation of self-assessment. International Journal of Quality Science. 1998, 3 (2): 147-170. 10.1108/13598539810211969.CrossRef Zink K, Schmidt A: Practice and implementation of self-assessment. International Journal of Quality Science. 1998, 3 (2): 147-170. 10.1108/13598539810211969.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Gadd KW: Business self-assessment: a strategic tool for building process robustness and achieving integrated management. Business Process Re-engineering and Management Journal. 1995, 1 (3): 66-85. 10.1108/EUM0000000003894.CrossRef Gadd KW: Business self-assessment: a strategic tool for building process robustness and achieving integrated management. Business Process Re-engineering and Management Journal. 1995, 1 (3): 66-85. 10.1108/EUM0000000003894.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Povey B: Continuous business improvement: linking the key improvement processes for your critical long-term success. 1996, McGraw Hill, London Povey B: Continuous business improvement: linking the key improvement processes for your critical long-term success. 1996, McGraw Hill, London
19.
go back to reference Pagani F: Peer Review as a Tool for Co-operation and Change. An analysis of an OECD working method African Security Review. 2002, 11 (4): 15-24. Pagani F: Peer Review as a Tool for Co-operation and Change. An analysis of an OECD working method African Security Review. 2002, 11 (4): 15-24.
20.
go back to reference Bergquist M: Practicing Peer Review in Organizations: A Qualifier for Knowledge Dissemination Legitimization. Journal of Information Technology. 2001, 16 (2): 99-112. 10.1080/02683960110054780.CrossRef Bergquist M: Practicing Peer Review in Organizations: A Qualifier for Knowledge Dissemination Legitimization. Journal of Information Technology. 2001, 16 (2): 99-112. 10.1080/02683960110054780.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Cook Harrington Laura MS: Nursing Peer Review: A Practical Approach to Promoting Professional Nursing Accountability. 2008, HCPro.Inc, Marblehead Cook Harrington Laura MS: Nursing Peer Review: A Practical Approach to Promoting Professional Nursing Accountability. 2008, HCPro.Inc, Marblehead
23.
go back to reference Kristensen B: The impact of quality monitoring on institutions: a Danish experience at the Copenhagen Business School. Quality in Higher Education. 1997, 3 (1): 87-94. 10.1080/1353832960030110.CrossRef Kristensen B: The impact of quality monitoring on institutions: a Danish experience at the Copenhagen Business School. Quality in Higher Education. 1997, 3 (1): 87-94. 10.1080/1353832960030110.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Russel J, Armitage J: Peer Review effectiveness: An analysis of potential loopholes within the USA Peer Review Program. Managerial Auditing Journal. 2006, 21 (1): 46-62. 10.1108/02686900610634757.CrossRef Russel J, Armitage J: Peer Review effectiveness: An analysis of potential loopholes within the USA Peer Review Program. Managerial Auditing Journal. 2006, 21 (1): 46-62. 10.1108/02686900610634757.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Stemler S: An Overview of Content Analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. 2001, 7 (17). Stemler S: An Overview of Content Analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. 2001, 7 (17).
26.
go back to reference Weber RP: Basic content analysis. 1990, SAGE Publication Inc, Newbury Park, 2CrossRef Weber RP: Basic content analysis. 1990, SAGE Publication Inc, Newbury Park, 2CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Saarinen T: Systematic Higher Education Assessment and Departmental Impacts: translating the effort to meet the need. Quality in higher education. 1995, 1 (3): 223-234. 10.1080/1353832950010304.CrossRef Saarinen T: Systematic Higher Education Assessment and Departmental Impacts: translating the effort to meet the need. Quality in higher education. 1995, 1 (3): 223-234. 10.1080/1353832950010304.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Rasmussen P: A Danish Approach to Quality in Higher Education: the Case of Aalborg University. Standards and Quality in Higher Education. Edited by: Kogan M. 1997, Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London, 245-275. Rasmussen P: A Danish Approach to Quality in Higher Education: the Case of Aalborg University. Standards and Quality in Higher Education. Edited by: Kogan M. 1997, Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London, 245-275.
29.
go back to reference Bazargan A: Introduction to assessing quality in higher medical education in Iran; challenges and perspectives. Quality in higher education. 1999, 5 (1): 61-68. 10.1080/1353832990050106.CrossRef Bazargan A: Introduction to assessing quality in higher medical education in Iran; challenges and perspectives. Quality in higher education. 1999, 5 (1): 61-68. 10.1080/1353832990050106.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Reed DM, Shergold K: Striving for excellence: how self-assessment using the business excellence model can result in step improvements in all areas of business activities. The TQM magazine. 1996, 8 (6): 48-52. 10.1108/09544789610152937.CrossRef Reed DM, Shergold K: Striving for excellence: how self-assessment using the business excellence model can result in step improvements in all areas of business activities. The TQM magazine. 1996, 8 (6): 48-52. 10.1108/09544789610152937.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Nyström ME: Managers’ subjective role projects during the initial phase of an organizational change process. Change and Quality in Human Service Work. Edited by: Korunka CHP. 2005, Hampp Publishers, Munich, 4 Nyström ME: Managers’ subjective role projects during the initial phase of an organizational change process. Change and Quality in Human Service Work. Edited by: Korunka CHP. 2005, Hampp Publishers, Munich, 4
34.
go back to reference Weiss GG: Is peer review worth saving?. Medicine Economics. 2005, 18 (82(4)): 46-48. 51–52 Weiss GG: Is peer review worth saving?. Medicine Economics. 2005, 18 (82(4)): 46-48. 51–52
35.
go back to reference Silva M, Reich R, Gallegos G: Effects of External Quality Evaluation in Chile: a preliminary study. Quality in higher education. 1997, 3 (1): 27-35. 10.1080/1353832960030104.CrossRef Silva M, Reich R, Gallegos G: Effects of External Quality Evaluation in Chile: a preliminary study. Quality in higher education. 1997, 3 (1): 27-35. 10.1080/1353832960030104.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Kilo CM: A framework for collaborative improvement: lessons from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s Breakthrough Series. Quality Management in Health Care. 1998, 6 (4): 1-13.CrossRefPubMed Kilo CM: A framework for collaborative improvement: lessons from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s Breakthrough Series. Quality Management in Health Care. 1998, 6 (4): 1-13.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Langley GL, Moen RD, Nolan KM, Nolan TW, Norman CL, Provost LP: The Improvement Guide: A Practical Approach to Enhancing Organizational Performance. 2009, Jossey Bass, San Francisco, 2 Langley GL, Moen RD, Nolan KM, Nolan TW, Norman CL, Provost LP: The Improvement Guide: A Practical Approach to Enhancing Organizational Performance. 2009, Jossey Bass, San Francisco, 2
Metadata
Title
Healthcare system intervention for prevention of birth injuries – process evaluation of self-assessment, peer review, feedback and agreement for change
Authors
Monica E Nyström
Anna Westerlund
Elisabet Höög
Charlotte Millde-Luthander
Ulf Högberg
Charlotta Grunewald
Publication date
01-12-2012
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2012
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-12-274

Other articles of this Issue 1/2012

BMC Health Services Research 1/2012 Go to the issue