Coaching and leadership for the diffusion of innovation in health care: a different type of multi-organization improvement collaborative

BACKGROUND: Health care organizations have suffered a steady decrease in operating margins in recent years while facing increased competition and pressure to provide ever-higher levels of customer service, quality of care, and innovation in delivery methodologies. The ability to rapidly find and implement changes that will lead to strategic improvement is critical. To assist member organizations in dealing with these issues, VHA Upper Midwest launched the Coaching and Leadership Initiative (VHA-CLI) in January 1999. The initiative was intended to develop new methods of collaborating for organizational learning of best practices, with a focus on generalizable change and deliberate leadership supports for deployment, diffusion, and sustainability. The emphasis was on the spread of ideas for improvement into all relevant corners of the organization. STRUCTURE AND PROCESS OF THE COLLABORATIVE: The structure of the VHA-CLI collaborative involved four waves of demonstration teams during 2 years. Each meeting of the collaborative included an executive session, team learning sessions (concepts applied to their improvement projects), and planning for the 6-month action period following the meeting. An important feature of the collaborative is the way in which teams in the various waves overlapped. For example, the Wave 1 team for a given organization came to a learning session in January 1999. At the second collaborative meeting in June 1999, the Wave 1 teams reported on the progress in their pilot sites. This meeting was also the kick-off session for the Wave 2 teams, which could learn about organizational culture and the improvement model from the efforts of their colleagues on Wave 1. Wave 1 teams also learned about and planned for spreading their efforts to other sites beyond the pilot. The pattern of multiple teams stretching across two waves of activity was repeated at every meeting of the collaborative. SUCCESS: Each organization in the collaborative has achieved improved outcomes around its selected clinical topics. In total, 26 teams have made significant improvement in 17 different topic areas. In addition, each organization has been able to successfully spread tested improvements to other individuals, teams, or locations, and the improvement work has become easier and more rapid with each successive cycle. CONCLUSIONS: The learning process initiated by this project will continue for at least another year in the VHA Upper Midwest region and will be expanded as participating organizations in other regions enroll in the VHA's national effort.     

Quality improvements in end of life care: insights from two collaboratives

BACKGROUND: Just a few generations ago, most people died suddenly, at any age. Now, most die of serious chronic disease, after a substantial period of disability. The care system does not serve this burgeoning population well. However, two quality improvement (QI) collaboratives sponsored by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement and the Center to Improve Care of the Dying set about making substantial improvements. INSIGHTS GAINED: The participating organization teams in two Breakthrough Series collaboratives found it best to identify patients by asking "Would it be surprising for this patient to die in the next year? (or the next few months?)" All the teams used standard QI approaches, with an aim, measures, and changes to try in Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles. In the first collaborative, 42 (89%) of the 47 teams made important improvements in their care systems. Because of the strength of their changes, the high performance of their team, the administrative support they received, and their ability to partner with other agencies, 13 (27%) of the teams made substantial, measurable improvement during the collaborative. In the second collaborative, 29 (85%) of the 34 teams made key changes to their care system, and 16 (47%) of the teams made substantial, measurable improvement. Coordination across programs such as between a hospital and a long term care facility or hospice remained an elusive goal, and good care cannot become routine without financing and coverage reform. CONCLUSION: Clinical providers can reliably make substantial improvements in end of life care, within a few months, and within current financing and regulation. Coordinated efforts in two Breakthrough Series produced generalizable insights.     

Reducing medication errors in hospitals: a peer review organization collaboration

BACKGROUND: Motivated by published reports of the incidence, costs, causes, and nature of adverse drug events (ADEs) in hospitalized patients, in 1997 the Medicare peer review organization for Nevada and Utah initiated a voluntary project of medication error reduction for Utah hospitals. METHODS: Through project activities, hospital teams were encouraged to make changes to their medication processes based on direct evaluation of medication systems characteristics, informed by ergonomic principles and published studies of medication errors. Assessment of project effects included an evaluation of the changes implemented and results from an anonymous medication errors survey of clinical staff from participating organizations. RESULTS: Thirteen of the 39 acute care hospitals in Utah participated in 1997-1998 in the collaborative project. Participants reported substantive medication system changes that were expected to result in improved patient safety. Baseline and follow-up survey data were available for 8 of the participating hospitals. Analysis of 560 responses showed a 26.9% decrease in overall error frequency, a 12.5% increase in error detection and prevention, and a 24.1% increase in formal written reporting of errors that reached the patient. CONCLUSIONS: This project demonstrated community interest in a proactive and collaborative approach to improving patient safety. The improvement efforts were substantive and sustainable. Survey results suggest that the changes implemented in participating organizations may have reduced medication errors and improved capacity for error detection and prevention.     

SSM Health Care clinical collaboratives: improving the value of patient care in a health care system

BACKGROUND: In 1998 SSM Health Care (St Louis) began a series of clinical collaboratives modeled after The Institute of Healthcare Improvement (Boston) Breakthrough Series. There are now four collaboratives, with 46 teams in progress, and four additional collaboratives are scheduled. COLLABORATIVE TOPICS AND STRUCTURE: Each collaborative consists of three phases: the prework, active, and the continuous improvement phases. The structure of the collaboratives is quite similar to that of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Breakthrough Series. However, the SSMHC collaboratives include a continuous improvement phase, which was designed to help maintain gains from the projects and to involve entities not originally involved in the collaborative. RESULTS OF COLLABORATIVES IN PROGRESS: Entity teams participating in multiple collaboratives seem to ascend a learning curve and become progressively more skilled in subsequent collaborative work. In Collaborative 1--Improving the Secondary Prevention of Ischemic Heart Disease--the participating entities showed significant improvement in cholesterol screening and treatment. In Collaborative 2--Improving Prescribing Practices--the collaborative teams also showed significant improvement, with a combined cost savings of approximately $450,000 per year. Collaboratives 3--Using Patient Information to Improve Care and Assure Success-and-4--Enhancing Patient Safety Through Safe Systems--are under way. SUMMARY: The collaboratives accelerate improvement work through sharing of successes and failures and peer influence within a reinforcing environment. Most of the collaborative teams have reached their project goals, and the pace of clinical improvement work has accelerated since the start of the collaboratives. The collaboratives provide an environment for clinicians to constructively participate in improvement of patient care.     

The 1999 ICSI/IHI colloquium on clinical quality improvement--"quality: settling the frontier"

BACKGROUND: A Colloquium on Clinical Quality Improvement, "Quality: Setting the Frontier," held in May 1999, covered methods and programs in clinical quality improvement. Leadership and organizational behavior were the main themes of the breakout sessions; specific topics included implementing guidelines, applying continuous quality improvement (CQI) methods in preventive services and primary care, and using systems thinking to improve clinical outcomes. Three keynote addresses were presented. LEADERSHIP FOR QUALITY: James L. Reinertsen, MD (CareGroup, Boston), characterized the financial challenges faced by many health care organizations as a "clarion call" for leadership on quality. "The leadership imperative is to establish an environment in which quality can thrive, despite unprecedented, severe economic pressures on our health systems." LINKING GROUP AND ORGANIZATIONAL KNOWLEDGE TO IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES: How do we make improvement more effective? G. Ross Baker, PhD (University of Toronto), reviewed what organizational literature says about making teams more effective, understanding the organizational context to enable improvement work, and augmenting existing methods for creating sustainable improvement. For example, he noted the increasing interest among may organizations in rapid-cycle improvement but cautioned that such efforts may work best where problems can be addressed by existing clinical teams (not cross-functional work groups) and where there are available solutions that have worked in other settings. IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENT FOR QUALITY: Mark Chassin, MD (Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York), stated that critical tasks for improving quality include increasing public awareness, engaging clinicians in improvement, increasing the investment in producing measures and improvement tools, and reinventing health care delivery, clinical education and training, and QI.     

Clinical performance improvement series. Classic CQI integrated with comprehensive disease management as a model for performance improvement.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, health and disease management has emerged as an effective means of delivering, integrating, and improving care through a population-based approach. Since 1997 the University of Pennsylvania Health System (UPHS) has utilized the key principles and components of continuous quality improvement (CQI) and disease management to form a model for health care improvement that focuses on designing best practices, using best practices to influence clinical decision making, changing processes and systems to deploy and deliver best practices, and measuring outcomes to improve the process. Experience with 28 programs and more than 14,000 patients indicates significant improvement in outcomes, including high physician satisfaction, increased patient satisfaction, reduced costs, and improved clinical process and outcome measures across multiple diseases. DIABETES DISEASE MANAGEMENT: In three months a UPHS multidisciplinary diabetes disease management team developed a best practice approach for the treatment of all patients with diabetes in the UPHS. After the program was pilot tested in three primary care physician sites, it was then introduced progressively to additional practice sites throughout the health system. The establishment of the role of the diabetes nurse care managers (certified diabetes educators) was central to successful program deployment. Office-based coordinators ensure incorporation of the best practice protocols into routine flow processes. A disease management intranet disseminates programs electronically. Outcomes of the UPHS health and disease management programs so far demonstrate success across multiple dimensions of performance-service, clinical quality, access, and value. DISCUSSION: The task of health care leadership today is to remove barriers and enable effective implementation of key strategies, such as health and disease management. Substantial effort and resources must be dedicated to gain physician buy-in and achieve compliance. The challenge is to provide leadership support, to reward and recognize best practice performers, and to emphasize the use of data for feedback and improvement. As these processes are implemented successfully, and evidence of improved outcomes is documented, it is likely that this approach will be more widely embraced and that organizationwide performance improvement will increase significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Health care has traditionally invested extraordinary resources in developing best practice approaches, including guidelines, education programs, or other tangible products and services. Comparatively little time, effort, and resources have been targeted to implementation and use, the stage at which most efforts fail. CQI's emphasis on data, rapid diffusion of innovative programs, and rapid cycle improvements enhance the implementation and effectiveness of disease management.     

Improving hypertension control: a team approach in a primary care setting

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP) control rates in the United States have not improved significantly during the past decade. There has been limited study of improvement efforts focusing on guideline implementation and changes in the model of care to address hypertension. METHODS: Five physician (MD)/registered nurse (RN)/licensed practical nurse (LPN) teams in a large community practice modified their care model in 1997 to manage hypertensive patients as part of guideline implementation efforts. The other 25 MD teams in the same setting practiced in the usual model, but were exposed to the guideline recommendations. BP control rates of patients in each group were assessed monthly. After nine months of testing the new care model, 10 additional teams adopted the model. RESULTS: In the pilot group, hypertension control rates showed statistically significant improvement from pre- (33.1%) to postimplementation (49.7%). After adjusting for age, this was significantly greater than the improvement in the control group (p = 0.033). Medication changes were more frequent in the pilot group (32.3%) than in the control group (27.6%); however, the differences were not statistically significant. A longitudinal examination of the hypertension patients in the study showed that improved BP control was sustained for at least 12 months. DISCUSSION: A change in the model of care for hypertensive patients within a primary care practice resulted in significant, sustainable improvement in BP control rates. These changes are consistent with the chronic care model developed by Wagner; practice redesign appeared to be the most important change.     

Using root cause analysis to address patient satisfaction and other improvement opportunities

BACKGROUND: Despite the considerable attention that health care organizations are devoting to the measurement of patient satisfaction, there is often confusion about how to systematically use these data to improve an organization's performance. A model to use in applying traditional quality improvement methods and tools to patient satisfaction problems includes five primary steps: (1) identifying opportunities, (2) prioritizing opportunities, (3) conducting root cause analysis, (4) designing and testing potential solutions, and (5) implementing the proposed solution. PATIENT SATISFACTION SURVEYS: A satisfaction survey serves best as a high-level screening device, not as a tool to provide highly detailed information about the root causes of patient dissatisfaction. The primary purpose of the survey in the model is to identify improvement opportunities and areas of significant improvement or deterioration. Secondary tools such as brief patient interviews or focus groups may better serve to probe intensively into the problem areas identified by the survey. These tools allow for a direct dialog with the patient to uncover root causes of dissatisfaction and establish potential solutions. DISCUSSION: Although the primary focus of this model has been patient satisfaction issues, the basic steps could easily be applied to virtually any improvement opportunity. Improvement teams should commit to a schedule of 90-minute weekly meetings for 7 weeks. The model, a simple translation of traditional improvement methods and tools to address the unique issues facing patient satisfaction improvement teams, can save improvement teams considerable time, resources, and frustration as they design and launch initiatives to improve patient satisfaction.     

Reducing adverse drug events: lessons from a breakthrough series collaborative

BACKGROUND: In January 1996, 38 hospitals and health care organizations (for a total of 40 hospitals) in the United States came together in an Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI; Boston) Breakthrough Series collaborative to reduce adverse drug events-injuries related to the use or nonuse of medications. METHODS: The participants were taught the Model for Improvement, a method for rapid-cycle change and evaluation, and were then coached on how to identify their own problem areas and develop changes in practice for rapid-cycle testing. These changes could be implementation of one or more known medication error prevention practices or new practices developed. RESULTS: During a 15-month period the 40 hospitals conducted a total of 739 tests of changes. Process changes accounted for 63% of the cycles; the remainder consisted of preliminary data gathering, consensus-building, or education cycles. Eight types of changes were implemented by seven or more hospitals, with a success rate of 70%. These changes included non-punitive reporting, ensuring documentation of allergy information, standardizing medication administration times, and implementing chemotherapy protocols. DISCUSSION: Success in making significant changes was associated with strong leadership, effective processes, and appropriate choice of intervention. Successful teams were able to define, clearly state, and relentlessly pursue their aims, and then chose practical interventions and moved early into changing a process. They did not spend months collecting data before beginning a change. Changes that were most successful were those that attempted to change processes, not people. Health care organizations committed to patient safety need not regard current performance limits as inevitable.     

Balancing accountability and improvement: a case study from Massachusetts

BACKGROUND: The Massachusetts Health Quality Partnership (MHQP), a coalition of health care providers and insurers, and business and government organizations, conducted a voluntary statewide survey about patients' experiences with inpatient care at Massachusetts hospitals in 1998, and made the results public. METHODS: MHQP contracted with The Picker Institute (Boston) to conduct the statewide survey about seven dimensions of care for adult medical, surgical, and maternity patients at 58 hospitals across Massachusetts. The communications strategy for public report release was designed to promote fair reporting by the news media and emphasize the improvement goals of performance measurement above evaluation. Along with critical agreements on report design, trial surveys, advertising, and commitments from coalition members about the use of survey results, these measures sought to drive out fear of participation and unfair evaluation. RESULTS: Statewide news media coverage reflected the project's communications goals. Editorial praise for the report was widespread. The project stimulated numerous hospital quality improvement efforts and focused hospital leaders on the need to improve patients' experiences with hospital care. All participating hospitals voluntarily renewed their enrollment for a third survey and public report cycle, and new hospitals joined the project. DISCUSSION: Voluntary public release of performance information by health care providers is possible when the risks, motivations, rewards, and penalties of measurement and public reporting are understood and carefully managed. The goals of public accountability reporting will be realized sooner when it is wedded to the spirit of continuous quality improvement and when providers are engaged as partners at every step of the measurement and reporting process.     

Integrating clinical performance improvement across physician organizations: the PhyCor experience

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of literature describing the implementation of clinical performance improvement (CPI) efforts across geographically dispersed multispecialty group practices and independent practice associations. PhyCor, a physician management company based in Nashville, Tennessee, has integrated CPI initiatives into its operating infrastructure. PhyCor CPI INITIATIVES: The strategic framework guiding PhyCor's CPI initiatives is built around a physician-driven, patient-centered model. Physician/administrator leadership teams develop and implement a clinical and financial strategic plan for performance improvement; adopt local clinical and operational performance indicators; and agree on and gain consensus with local physician champions to engage in CPI initiatives. The area/regional leadership councils integrate and coordinate regional medical management and CPI initiatives among local groups and independent practice associations. In addition to these councils and a national leadership council, condition-specific care management councils have also been established. These councils develop condition-specific protocols and outcome measures and lead the implementation of CPI initiatives at their own clinics. RESOURCES: Key resources supporting CPI initiatives include information/knowledge management, education and training, and patient education and consumer decision support. PRELIMINARY RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS: Localized efforts in both the asthma care and diabetes management initiatives have led to some preliminary improvements in quality of care indicators. CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS AND CHALLENGES: Physician leadership and strategic vision, CPI-oriented organizational infrastructure, broad-based physician involvement in CPI, providing access to performance data, parallel incentives, and creating a sense of urgency for accelerated change are all critical success factors to the implementation of CPI strategies at the local, regional, and national levels.     

Evidence-based management: using serial firm trials to improve diabetes care quality

BACKGROUND: The design of delivery systems that can truly conduct continuous quality improvement (CQI) as a routine part of clinical care provision remains a vexing problem. The effectiveness of the "computerized firm system" approach to chronic disease CQI was examined, with diabetes as the focus of a 5-year case study. METHODS: A large family medical center had been divided into two parallel group practices for reasons of efficiency. These frontline structures (also known as primary care "firms") were supported to serially adapt and evaluate selected CQI interventions by first introducing process changes on one firm but not the other and comparing the groups. Because all the required longitudinal data were contained in a computerized repository, it was possible to conduct these controlled "firm trials" in a matter of months at low cost. RESULTS: During a 3-year period, implementation of point-of-service reminders and a pharmacist out-reach program increased recommended glycohemoglobin (HbA1c) testing by 50% (p = 0.02) and reduced the number of diabetic patients inadequately controlled by 43% (p < 0.01). Following this outcome improvement, patients exhibited a 16% reduction in ambulatory visit rates (p = 0.04). The observed outcome improvement, however, was reversed during the subsequent 2 years, when staffing austerities forced by unrelated declines in clinic revenue caused the withdrawal of trial interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The processes and outcomes of diabetes care were improved, demonstrating that CQI and controlled trials are not mutually exclusive in moving toward the practice of evidence-based management. Health care systems can, by conducting serial firm trials, become learning organizations. CQI programs of all kinds will likely never flourish, however, until quality improvement and reimbursement mechanisms have become better aligned.     

Overcoming turf battles: developing a pragmatic, collaborative model to improve glycemic control in patients with diabetes

BACKGROUND: Collaboration between primary care physicians (PCPs) and endocrinologists should be the first step in improving care of patients with diabetes. However, the coordination of care between specialists and PCPs often does not work well. At Vanderbilt University Medical Center, a collaborative model between PCPs and endocrinology was used in an effort to improve glycemic control for patients with diabetes. METHODS: In 1998 a project team was formed; the team members attempted to find ways to improve the care of patients with diabetes, specifically patients with poor glycemic control. The team proceeded through ten iterations of the model before reaching one accepted by all-one with clear responsibilities and referral criteria. RESULTS: Survey results indicated a high level of satisfaction with the collaborative model among patients and PCPs. Appropriate referrals to the diabetes improvement program--a 12-week outpatient program consisting of instruction and support in diabetes self-management coupled with adjustment of insulin and oral hypoglycemic medications-increased during the team effort, and a control chart indicated a change in the process that was significant and sustained. The patients enrolled in the program experienced a reduction of mean glycated hemoglobin levels from 9.2% at entry to 7.5% after 3 months (p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: An initial first step to improving care is to create an environment of trust and collaboration between the PCPs and specialists who assist in that care. After this collaboration has been established, many of the improvements identified in other studies can more easily be implemented.     

Federal efforts to improve quality of care: the Quality Interagency Coordination Task Force (QuIC)

FORMATION OF THE QUIC: The Quality Interagency Coordination Task Force (QuIC) was established in 1998 to enable the participating federal agencies to coordinate their activities to study, measure, and improve the quality of care delivered by federal health programs; provide people with information to help them in making more informed choices about their care; and develop the research base and infrastructure needed to improve the health care system, including knowledgeable and empowered workers, well-designed systems of care, and useful information systems. STUDY, MEASURE, AND IMPROVE CARE: The QuIC's initial efforts to improve the care delivered in federal health care programs have focused on diabetes, depression, and the effect of working conditions on quality of care. More recently, patient safety efforts are under way to establish a coordinating center that will enable those who are testing methods of reducing errors to share information across their projects and with experts in error reduction. DEVELOP A RESEARCH BASE AND INFRASTRUCTURE: The QuIC has coordinated efforts in credentialing, information on measures of quality, a taxonomy of quality improvement methods, and errors data collection. PROVIDE INFORMATION TO AMERICANS ABOUT HEALTH CARE QUALITY: The QuIC agencies are developing products that will enhance their ability to communicate with the American people about their health care choices: improved gateways for consumer information available from federal agencies, a glossary of commonly used terms, and guidance for producing report cards on quality of care. MOVING THE QUALITY IMPROVEMENT AGENDA FORWARD: Federal efforts to improve quality of care are moving forward in a more integrated fashion on a wide number of fronts.     

Use of consumer ratings for quality improvement in behavioral health insurance plans

BACKGROUND: The Consumer Assessment of Behavioral Healthcare Services (CABHS) survey collects consumers' reports about their health care plans and treatment. The use of the CABHS to identify opportunities for improvement, with specific attention to how organizations have used the survey information for quality improvement, is described. METHODS: In 1998 and 1999, data were collected from five groups of adult patients in commercial health plans and five groups of adult patients in public assistance health plans with services received through four organizations (one of three managed behavioral health care organizations or a health system). Patients who received behavioral health care services during the previous year were mailed the CABHS survey. Non-respondents were contacted by telephone to complete the survey. RESULTS: Response rates ranged from 49% to 65% for commercial patient groups and from 36% to 51% for public assistance patients. Promptly getting treatment from clinicians and aspects of care most influenced by health plan policies and operations, such as access to treatment and plan administrative services, received the least positive responses, whereas questions about communication received the most positive responses. In addition, questions about access- and plan-related aspects of quality showed the most interplan variability. Three of the organizations in this study focused quality improvement efforts on access to treatment. DISCUSSION: Surveys such as the CABHS can identify aspects of the plan and treatment that are improvement priorities. Use of these data is likely to extend beyond the behavioral health plan to consumers, purchasers, regulators, and policymakers, particularly because the National Committee for Quality Assurance is encouraging behavioral health plans to use a similar survey for accreditation purposes.     

Using an improvement model to reduce adverse drug events in VA facilities

BACKGROUND: Adverse drug events cause significant morbidity and mortality in health care. Many adverse drug events are due to medication errors and are preventable. In 1999 and 2000 the Patient Safety Center of Inquiry collaborated with the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) to implement a quality improvement (QI) project designed to reduce medication errors within the Veterans Administration system. METHODS: During a 6- to 9-month period, interdisciplinary teams that want to achieve much higher levels of performance work on a common aim, under the guidance of faculty, and come together for three 2-day educational and planning sessions. Between these sessions, teams implement some of the suggested changes, measure the results of those changes, and report back to the larger group. RESULTS: During the formal project, teams collected allergy information on more than 20,000 veterans and averted 1,833 medication errors that had the potential to cause adverse events. At 6-month follow-up, the majority of teams remained intact, continued to collect data, and maintained their gains, approximately doubling the results obtained during the formal project. Half of the teams expanded their efforts to other settings, and one-third of the teams expanded beyond their original topics. Returns on investment in the QI effort were substantial. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that gains made in organized QI efforts can be maintained for 6 months without additional external support or coaching if team structure and leadership support remain intact. Facilitators of QI efforts should focus on teams that are having difficulty learning new techniques. Finally, this effort appeared to generate cost savings.     

Pursuing perfection: an interview with Don Berwick and Michael Rothman. Interview by Andrea Kabcenell and Jane Roessner

Don Berwick and Michael Rothman discuss the Pursuing Perfection initiative, which is intended to help health care organizations integrate improvement work into day-to-day life, with systemwide changes in infrastructure, project management, care, and leadership.     

High Reliability Organization Research: A Literature Review for Health Care

Abstract

High reliability organizations (HROs) operate in hazardous, fast-paced, and complex environments yet avoid catastrophic accidents. Since the genesis of HRO theory in 1989, interest in HROs has grown beyond hazardous operations to many industries, including health care. This article reviews the literature to determine the extent to which changes made in health care organizations are aligned with HRO theory, and more specifically, with Roberts’ Six Actions, which are based on HRO theory. The results suggest that HRO theory remains of interest to health care organizations. Implications for engineering managers and opportunities for future research are suggested.     

The perspectives of Aboriginal patients and their health care providers on improving the quality of hemodialysis services: A qualitative study

Chronic kidney disease has a higher prevalence in Indigenous populations globally. The incidence of end‐stage kidney disease in Australian Aboriginal people is eight times higher than non‐Aboriginal Australians. Providing services to rural and remote Aboriginal people with chronic disease is challenging because of access and cultural differences. This study aims to describe and analyze the perspectives of Aboriginal patients' and health care providers' experience of renal services, to inform service improvement for rural Aboriginal hemodialysis patients. We conducted a thematic analysis of interviews with Aboriginal patients (n = 18) receiving hemodialysis in rural Australia and health care providers involved in their care (n = 29). An overarching theme of avoiding the “costly” crisis encompassed four subthemes: (1) Engaging patients earlier (prevent late diagnosis, slow disease progression); (2) flexible family‐focused care (early engagement of family, flexibility to facilitate family and cultural obligations); (3) managing fear of mainstream services (originating in family dialysis experiences and previous racism when engaging with government organizations); (4) service provision shaped by culture (increased home dialysis, Aboriginal support and Aboriginal‐led cultural education). Patients and health care providers believe service redesign is required to meet the needs of Aboriginal hemodialysis patients. Participants identified early screening and improving the relationship of Aboriginal people with health systems would reduce crisis entry to hemodialysis. These strategies alongside improving the cultural competence of staff would reduce patients' fear of mainstream services, decrease the current emotional and family costs of care, and increase efficiency of health expenditure on a challenging and increasingly unsustainable treatment system.     

The AMA clinical quality improvement forum on addressing patient safety

BACKGROUND: More than 200 health care policy makers and researchers, clinicians, quality professionals, and other representatives of health care organizations, government, and academia attended the Division of American Medical Association Clinical Quality Improvement's conference, "Addressing Patient Safety," April 28, 2000, in Chicago--the first national conference to respond to the recent Institute of Medicine (IOM) report, To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. ADDRESSING PATIENT SAFETY--PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PERSPECTIVES: John M. Eisenberg, MD, stated that research on errors is needed to describe the scope and nature of the problem, understand the barriers to and benefits of improvement, and develop and test strategies for improvement. Kenneth W. Kizer, MD, MPH, stated that the National Quality Forum will develop a compendium of best practices and will develop core measures for serious adverse events, and health care organizations and government health programs should act now to make a clear organizational commitment to patient safety, create a nonpunitive health care culture of safety, and implement known safe medication practices. Alan R. Nelson, MD, stated that the IOM report places its emphasis on continuous quality improvement and technology that can be used to mitigate the risks in a complex health system. HOSPITAL AND ACCREDITATION AGENCY ACTIVITIES ON PATIENT SAFETY ISSUES: Donald M. Nielsen, MD, discussed the American Hospital Association's (AHA's) Medication Safety Initiative, which promised to provide its members with successful practices, tools, and resources and to track progress of implementation of the recommended successful practices. Dennis S. O'Leary, MD, stated that when a hospital reports a sentinel event, the hospital is expected to implement improvements to reduce risk and monitor their effectiveness. The National Committee for Quality Assurance is considering changes to its accreditation standards to further address patient safety.