Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39332903›Full record

ArticleBMJ quality & safety2025

Do healthcare professionals work around safety standards, and should we be worried? A scoping review.

Debbie Clark, Rebecca Lawton, Ruth Baxter, Laura Sheard, Jane K O'Hara

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors.

Debbie ClarkFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK hcdjc@leeds.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7356-0397
Rebecca LawtonSchool of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5832-402X
Ruth BaxterSchool of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Laura SheardHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Jane K O'HaraThe Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealthcare staff adapt to challenges faced when delivering healthcare by using workarounds. Sometimes, safety standards, the very things used to routinely mitigate risk in healthcare, are the obstacles that staff work around. While workarounds have negative connotations, there is an argument that, in some circumstances, they contribute to the delivery of safe care.

objectivesIn this scoping review, we explore the circumstances and perceived implications of safety standard workarounds (SSWAs) conducted in the delivery of frontline care.

methodWe searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science for articles reporting on the circumstances and perceived implications of SSWAs in healthcare. Data charting was undertaken by two researchers. A narrative synthesis was developed to produce a summary of findings.

resultsWe included 27 papers in the review, which reported on workarounds of 21 safety standards. Over half of the papers (59%) described working around standards related to medicine safety. As medication standards featured frequently in papers, SSWAs were reported to be performed by registered nurses in 67% of papers, doctors in 41% of papers and pharmacists in 19% of papers. Organisational causes were the most prominent reason for workarounds.Papers reported on the perceived impact of SSWAs for care quality. At times SSWAs were being used to support the delivery of person-centred, timely, efficient and effective care. Implications of SSWAs for safety were diverse. Some papers reported SSWAs had both positive and negative implications for safety simultaneously. SSWAs were reported to be beneficial for patients more often than they were detrimental.

conclusionSSWAs are used frequently during the delivery of everyday care, particularly during medication-related processes. These workarounds are often used to balance different risks and, in some circumstances, to achieve safe care.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelPatient SafetySafety ManagementHumansPatient safetyQuality improvementStandards of care

Identifiers

PMID39332903
PMCPMC12013549

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.