Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38902021›Full record

ArticleBMJ quality & safety2024

Understanding the enablers and barriers to implementing a patient-led escalation system: a qualitative study.

Elizabeth Sutton, Mudathir Ibrahim, William Plath, Lesley Booth, Mark Sujan, Peter McCulloch, Nicola Mackintosh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Patient and family activated escalation systems: a systematic review.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Elizabeth SuttonHealth Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK es225@le.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6691-6287
Mudathir IbrahimDepartment of General Surgery, Maimonides Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6345-1533
William PlathNuffield Department of Surgery, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
Lesley BoothCambridge Rare Disease Network, Cambridge, UK.
Mark SujanHuman Factors Everywhere, Woking, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6895-946X
Peter McCullochNuffield Department of Surgery, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3210-8273
Nicola MackintoshHealth Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0137-6432

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe management of acute deterioration following surgery remains highly variable. Patients and families can play an important role in identifying early signs of deterioration but effective contribution to escalation of care can be practically difficult to achieve. This paper reports the enablers and barriers to the implementation of patient-led escalation systems found during a process evaluation of a quality improvement programme Rescue for Emergency Surgery Patients Observed to uNdergo acute Deterioration (RESPOND).

methodsThe research used ethnographic methods, including over 100 hours of observations on surgical units in three English hospitals in order to understand the everyday context of care. Observations focused on the coordination of activities such as handovers and how rescue featured as part of this. We also conducted 27 interviews with a range of clinical and managerial staff and patients. We employed a thematic analysis approach, combined with a theoretically focused implementation coding framework, based on Normalisation Process Theory.

resultsWe found that organisational infrastructural support in the form of a leadership support and clinical care outreach teams with capacity were enablers in implementing the patient-led escalation system. Barriers to implementation included making changes to professional practice without discussing the value and legitimacy of operationalising patient concerns, and ensuring equity of use. We found that organisational work is needed to overcome patient fears about disrupting social and cultural norms.

conclusionsThis paper reveals the need for infrastructural support to facilitate the implementation of a patient-led escalation system, and leadership support to normalise the everyday process of involving patients and families in escalation. This type of system may not achieve its goals without properly understanding and addressing the concerns of both nurses and patients.

Indexed as

Qualitative ResearchQuality ImprovementAnthropology, CulturalEnglandHumansInterviews as TopicLeadershiphealthcare quality improvementpatient safetyqualitative researchsafety culturesurgery

Identifiers

PMID38902021
PMCPMC11672010

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.