Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25918338›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2015

Participatory design of a preliminary safety checklist for general practice.

Paul Bowie, Julie Ferguson, Marion MacLeod, Susan Kennedy, Carl de Wet, Duncan McNab, Moya Kelly, John McKay, Sarah Atkinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A meta-review of methods of measuring and monitoring safety in primary care.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Frontiers in human factors: embedding specialists in multi-disciplinary efforts to improve healthcare.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Patient safety: the general practice agenda.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2015
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Paul BowieDepartment of Postgraduate GP Education, NHS Education for Scotland, Glasgow, and honorary senior lecturer, Department of General Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow.
Julie FergusonDepartment of Postgraduate GP Education, NHS Education for Scotland, Glasgow.
Marion MacLeodDepartment of Postgraduate GP Education, NHS Education for Scotland, Glasgow.
Susan KennedyDepartment of Postgraduate GP Education, NHS Education for Scotland, Glasgow.
Carl de WetDepartment of Postgraduate GP Education, NHS Education for Scotland, Glasgow, and PhD candidate, Department of General Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow.
Duncan McNabDepartment of Postgraduate GP Education, NHS Education for Scotland, Glasgow.
Moya KellyDepartment of Postgraduate GP Education, NHS Education for Scotland, Glasgow.
John McKayDepartment of Postgraduate GP Education, NHS Education for Scotland, Glasgow.
Sarah AtkinsonHuman Factors Research Group, University of Nottingham, Nottingham.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of checklists to minimise errors is well established in high reliability, safety-critical industries. In health care there is growing interest in checklists to standardise checking processes and ensure task completion, and so provide further systemic defences against error and patient harm. However, in UK general practice there is limited experience of safety checklist use.

aimTo identify workplace hazards that impact on safety, health and wellbeing, and performance, and codesign a standardised checklist process. DESIGN AND

settingApplication of mixed methods to identify system hazards in Scottish general practices and develop a safety checklist based on human factors design principles.

methodA multiprofessional 'expert' group (n = 7) and experienced front-line GPs, nurses, and practice managers (n = 18) identified system hazards and developed and validated a preliminary checklist using a combination of literature review, documentation review, consensus building workshops using a mini-Delphi process, and completion of content validity index exercise.

resultsA prototype safety checklist was developed and validated consisting of six safety domains (for example, medicines management), 22 sub-categories (for example, emergency drug supplies) and 78 related items (for example, stock balancing, secure drug storage, and cold chain temperature recording).

conclusionHazards in the general practice work system were prioritised that can potentially impact on the safety, health and wellbeing of patients, GP team members, and practice performance, and a necessary safety checklist prototype was designed. However, checklist efficacy in improving safety processes and outcomes is dependent on user commitment, and support from leaders and promotional champions. Although further usability development and testing is necessary, the concept should be of interest in the UK and internationally.

Indexed as

ChecklistDelivery of Health CarePatient SafetyAdultFemaleGeneral PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsUnited Kingdomchecklistsgeneral practicehuman factorsparticipatory design, patient safety

Identifiers

PMID25918338
PMCPMC4408522

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.