IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v27y2018i7-8p1621-1631.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient perceptions of deterioration and patient and family activated escalation systems—A qualitative study

Author

Listed:
  • Jessica Guinane
  • Alison M Hutchinson
  • Tracey K Bucknall

Abstract

Aims and objectives To investigate the experiences of patients who received a medical emergency team review following a period of clinical deterioration and their views about the potential use of a patient and family activated escalation system. Background Delay or failure by health professionals to respond to clinical deterioration remains a patient safety concern. Patients may sometimes identify subtle cues of early deterioration prior to changes in vital signs. In response to health professional and system failures, patient and family activated escalation systems have been mandated and implemented in Australia. However, little research has evaluated their effectiveness nor taken patients’ perspectives into account. Design Qualitative exploratory descriptive design was used. Methods Purposive sampling was used. Semistructured interviews were undertaken in 2014 with 33 patients who required medical emergency team intervention. Data were collected from one private and one public hospital in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. The framework method was used to analyse the data. Results All patients stated that it was the clinician who detected and responded to deterioration. Private patient participants were unaware of the medical emergency team system, and felt escalating care was not their responsibility. These patients reported being too sick to communicate prior to and during medical emergency team review and did not favour a patient and family activated escalation system. Public patients were well informed about the medical emergency team system yet expressed concerns around overriding clinicians if activating a patient and family activated escalation system. Conclusion Patient participation during a period of deterioration is restricted by their clinical condition and limited medical knowledge. Patients felt comfortable to communicate concerns to clinicians but felt they would not activate the patient and family activated escalation system. This behoves clinicians to actively listen and respond to patient concerns. Relevance to clinical practice Clinicians must promote a collaborative relationship and encourage patients to communicate their concerns. Given the perceived barriers to patient and family activated escalation systems use, resources being employed for their implementation could be redistributed to other areas of patient safety.

Suggested Citation

  • Jessica Guinane & Alison M Hutchinson & Tracey K Bucknall, 2018. "Patient perceptions of deterioration and patient and family activated escalation systems—A qualitative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(7-8), pages 1621-1631, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:27:y:2018:i:7-8:p:1621-1631
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14202
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14202
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.14202?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jane Vorwerk & Lindy King, 2016. "Consumer participation in early detection of the deteriorating patient and call activation to rapid response systems: a literature review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(1-2), pages 38-52, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:27:y:2018:i:7-8:p:1621-1631. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.