Video Recording Patients for Direct Care Purposes: Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis of International Empirical Studies and UK Professional Guidance.

Background: Video recordings of patients may offer advantages to supplement patient assessment and clinical decision-making. However, little is known about the practice of video recording patients for direct care purposes.

Objective: We aimed to synthesize empirical studies published internationally to explore the extent to which video recording patients is acceptable and effective in supporting direct care and, for the United Kingdom, to summarize the relevant guidance of professional and regulatory bodies.

Are Bubbles the Future of Dysphagia Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review Analysing Evidence on the Use of Carbonated Liquids in Dysphagia Rehabilitation.

Background: Dysphagia poses a huge health issue in our ageing population, impacting patients psychologically and through risk of aspiration, malnutrition and airway obstruction. The use of carbonated liquids to provide sensory enhancement as a tool to stimulate neuromuscular activity in dysphagia rehabilitation remains an area with limited research. This article reviews current evidence.

How do hospital inpatients conceptualise patient safety? A qualitative interview study using constructivist grounded theory.

Background: Efforts to involve patients in patient safety continue to revolve around professionally derived notions of minimising clinical risk, yet evidence suggests that patients hold perspectives on patient safety that are distinct from clinicians and academics. This study aims to understand how hospital inpatients across three different specialties conceptualise patient safety and develop a conceptual model that reflects their perspectives.

Methods: A qualitative semi-structured interview study was conducted with 24 inpatients across three clinical specialties (medicine for the elderly, elective surgery and maternity) at a large central London teaching hospital.

What matters to medical ward patients, and do we measure it? A qualitative comparison of patient priorities and current practice in quality measurement, on UK NHS medical wards.

Objectives: To compare the quality metrics selected for public display on medical wards to patients' and carers' expressed quality priorities.

Methods: Multimodal qualitative evaluation of general medical wards and semi-structured interviews.

Setting: UK tertiary National Health Service (public) hospital.

Translating staff experience into organisational improvement: the HEADS-UP stepped wedge, cluster controlled, non-randomised trial.

Objectives: Frontline insights into care delivery correlate with patients' clinical outcomes. These outcomes might be improved through near-real time identification and mitigation of staff concerns. We evaluated the effects of a prospective frontline surveillance system on patient and team outcomes.

Translating concerns into action: a detailed qualitative evaluation of an interdisciplinary intervention on medical wards.

Objectives: To understand how frontline reports of day-to-day care failings might be better translated into improvement.

Design: Qualitative evaluation of an interdisciplinary team intervention capitalising on the frontline experience of care delivery. Prospective clinical team surveillance (PCTS) involved structured interdisciplinary briefings to capture challenges in care delivery, facilitated organisational escalation of the issues they identified, and feedback.

Multi-Morbidity in Hospitalised Older Patients: Who Are the Complex Elderly?

Background: No formal definition for the "complex elderly" exists; moreover, these older patients with high levels of multi-morbidity are not readily identified as such at point of hospitalisation, thus missing a valuable opportunity to manage the older patient appropriately within the hospital setting.

Objectives: To empirically identify the complex elderly patient based on degree of multi-morbidity.

Design: Retrospective observational study using administrative data.

A stepped wedge, cluster controlled trial of an intervention to improve safety and quality on medical wards: the HEADS-UP study protocol.

Introduction: The majority of preventable deaths in healthcare are due to errors on general wards. Staff perceptions of safety correlate with patient survival, but effectively translating ward teams' concerns into tangibly improved care remains problematic. The Hospital Event Analysis Describing Significant Unanticipated Problems (HEADS-UP) trial evaluates a structured, multidisciplinary team briefing, capturing safety threats and adverse events, with rapid feedback to clinicians and service managers.

Patient safety skills in primary care: a national survey of GP educators.

Background: Clinicians have a vital role in promoting patient safety that goes beyond their technical competence. The qualities and attributes of the safe hospital doctor have been explored but similar work within primary care is lacking. Exploring the skills and attributes of a safe GP may help to inform the development of training programmes to promote patient safety within primary care.

What is known about adverse events in older medical hospital inpatients? A systematic review of the literature.

Purpose: Large international studies have shown that older hospital inpatients are at particular risk of adverse events. The purpose of this review was to synthesize data from studies designed to assess the scale and nature of this harm, with the ultimate aim of informing the development of new safety and quality measurement tools to facilitate improved hospital care for these vulnerable patients.

Data Sources Study Selection: and data extraction A systematic search using Ovid SP and other sources was carried out, rigorous inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied and quality assessment of included studies was conducted.

How can we keep patients with dementia safe in our acute hospitals? A review of challenges and solutions.

Maintaining patient safety in acute hospitals is a global health challenge. Traditionally, patient safety measures have been concentrated on critical care and surgical patients. In this review the medical literature was reviewed over the last ten years on aspects of patient safety specifically related to patients with dementia.

U.K. parents' decision-making about measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine 10 years after the MMR-autism controversy: a qualitative analysis.

Background And Objectives: Public concern about an unsubstantiated link between MMR vaccine and autism stemmed from a 1998 paper by Dr Andrew Wakefield and colleagues, and the substantial media coverage which that work attracted. Though the Wakefield paper is now discredited and an MMR-autism link has never been demonstrated empirically, this concern has manifested in over a decade of suboptimal MMR uptake. Few qualitative studies have explored parents' MMR decision-making since uptake began to improve in 2004.

Reviewing methodologically disparate data: a practical guide for the patient safety research field.

This article addresses key questions frequently asked by researchers conducting systematic reviews in patient safety. This discipline is relatively young, and asks complex questions about complex aspects of health care delivery and experience, therefore its studies are typically methodologically heterogeneous, non-randomized and complex; but content rich and highly relevant to practice. Systematic reviews are increasingly necessary to drive forward practice and research in this area, but the data do not always lend themselves to 'standard' review methodologies.

Factors underlying parental decisions about combination childhood vaccinations including MMR: a systematic review.

Suboptimal childhood vaccination uptake results in disease outbreaks, and in developed countries is largely attributable to parental choice. To inform evidence-based interventions, we conducted a systematic review of factors underlying parental vaccination decisions. Thirty-one studies were reviewed.