Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Frankel, A.
Right arrow Articles by Bates, D. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Frankel, A.
Right arrow Articles by Bates, D. W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal for Quality in Health Care 15:i31-i40 (2003)
© 2003 International Society for Quality in Health Care

Improving patient safety across a large integrated health care delivery system

Allan Frankel1, Tejal K. Gandhi2 and David W. Bates1,2

1 Partners HealthCare System, Boston, MA,
2 Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

Objective. Patient safety is moving up the list of priorities for hospitals and health care delivery systems, but improving safety across a large organization is challenging. We sought to create a common patient safety strategy for the Partners HealthCare system, a large, integrated, non-profit health care delivery system in the United States.

Design. Partners identified a central Patient Safety Officer, who then formed a Patient Safety Advisory Group with local expert members, as well as a Patient Safety Leaders Group comprised of personnel responsible for patient safety at each member institution. The latter group meets monthly to help determine future projects and to share the results of piloting and implementation. There was broad consensus that interventions should include the areas of culture change, process change, and process measurement.

Setting. A large, integrated health care delivery system in the Boston, Massachusetts, area.

Results. Key milestones to date include implementation of Executive WalkRounds, development of accountability principles, agreement to create a common system-wide adverse event reporting system, and agreement to implement computerized physician order entry in all hospitals. These efforts have heightened awareness of patient safety considerably within the network. Most influenced to date have been the senior leaders of the hospitals, which has resulted in substantial support for patient safety initiatives.

Conclusions. This loosely integrated delivery system represents a daunting landscape for the development and institution of patient safety concepts. Many projects aimed at different components of patient safety must occur at the same time for significant change, yet culture and care-related beliefs vary substantially within the system, and measurement is especially challenging. Moreover, with many potential interventions, and limited resources, prioritization and selection is difficult. Nonetheless, consensus about some issues has been reached, in particular because of a well delineated patient safety structure. We believe the net result will be substantial improvement in patient safety.

Keywords: culture, patient safety, quality improvement

Accepted for publication July 21, 2003.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Health (London)Home page
J. F. Travaglia, M. T. Westbrook, and J. Braithwaite
Implementation of a patient safety incident management system as viewed by doctors, nurses and allied health professionals
Health (London) , May 1, 2009; 13(3): 277 - 296.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Am J Health Syst PharmHome page
D. J. Cobaugh and E. P. Krenzelok
Adverse drug reactions and therapeutic errors in older adults: A hazard factor analysis of poison center data
Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm., November 15, 2006; 63(22): 2228 - 2234.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.